9. I have gone through the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner, which is reported as “Muhammad Ajkram v. Mst. Shakeela Bibi and others”(2003 C L C 1787) in which it was held as under:-
“The bare reading of this section shows that the learned Judge Family Court is restrained by law not to allow additional evidence or add names of witnesses in the schedule. The provisions are mandatory. The schedule cannot be amended and the names of the witnesses cannot be added under section 7(2) of the Family Courts Act. The provisions of this section empowers the learned Judge Family Court that the parties with the permission of the Court call any witness at any later stage if Court considers such evidence expedient in the interest of justice does not mean that the Family Court will reopen the schedule and allow the parties to produce additional witnesses, therefore, the learned Judge Family Court rightly rejected the application as there was no provision to allow a Family Court to reopen he schedule submitted by the parties.”
Part of Judgment :
3990-14
0 comments:
Post a Comment