No doubt to achieve afore-noted aims and objects, by
way of Section 17 of the Act, ibid application of Code of
Civil Procedure, 1908 (C.P.C.) except Sections 10 and 11
has been excluded in order to avoid technicalities by
providing a short, simple and speedy methodology for
settlement and disposal of disputes relating to family
matters. Notwithstanding the fact that provisions of
C.P.C. are not stricto senso applied to the cases of the
Family Courts so as to achieve the ends of settlement of
such disputes at the earliest, yet it is settled law that the
Family Court has discretion and is always competent to
adopt any procedure to decide the case provided such
procedure is not expressly barred by the said Act of 1964 or offends any of its provisions or is violative of any right
of parties being against the principles of fair hearing/trial.
Meaning thereby that the Family Court can follow the
principles and procedure laid down in C.P.C. if such
principles are not contrary to the Family Laws and are
matching with aims and objects of the Family Court, Act.
Steering thoughts in this regard, besides Farzana
Rasool’s case supra, have been gathered from
Muhammad Tabish Naeem Khan v. Addl. District Judge,
Lahore (2014 SCMR 1365), Abdul Rehman v. Mst.
Ruqia Begum and others (2018 C.L.C. Note 35 Lahore),
Sulman Ahmad Khan v. Judge Family Court, Multan and
others (PLD 2017 Lahore 689), Malik Hashim Amir
Khan v. Mst. Saadia Tabbassum and another (2015
MLD 89 Lahore), Ghulam Murtaza v. Additional Distt.
Judge (II) D.G. Khan and 2 others (1999 C.L.C. 81
Lahore) and Nadeem Yousaf v. Sara Nadeem and
3others 2017 MLD 786 Lahore).
Part Of judgment of
LAHORE HIGH COURT, MULTAN BENCH, MULTAN
Writ Petition-Family-Maintenance
2932-20
| 2020 LHC 758 |
0 comments:
Post a Comment