PLJ 2010 Lahore 426

Constitution of Pakistan, 1973--

----Art. 199--Constitutional petition--Order passed by Executing Court in execution proceedings on objection petition was challenged through writ petition--Petitioner did not assail judgment and decree of Family Court and did not file an appeal before Distt Judge--Appeal was not filed as such judgment and decree of Family Court attained the status of finality--Validity--Petitioner did not file the appeal against the judgment and decree, thus the decree attained finality--Present objection petition was filed just to prolong the matter to avoid payments, till passing of the order petitioner did not pay single penny to respondent--Petition was dismissed in limine. [P. 428] A

Mr. Mazhar Hayat Bhatti, Advocate for Petitioner.

Date of hearing: 11.11.2009.

 PLJ 2010 Lahore 426
[Multan Bench Multan]
Present: Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari, J.
ABID HUSSAIN--Petitioner
versus
JUDGE FAMILY COURT--Respondent
W.P. No. 7733 of 2009, decided on 11.11.2009.

Order

Through this constitutional petition, petitioner calls in question the order dated 04.06.2009 passed by learned Judge Family Court/Executing Court in execution proceedings on objection petition filed by the petitioner/judgment-debtor.

2.  Brief facts of the instant writ petition are that petitioner was married with Respondent No. 2, Sajida Mai on 16.02.2001, against four tolas gold ornaments, and 5 Marlas land situated in Mauza Kherra abad Basti Perraywali was fixed as dower in Nikah Nama. In the beginning relations between the spouses remained cordial and they enjoyed the happy matrimonial life, out of this wedlock, Muhammad Noshairwan Respondent No. 3 was born.

3.  Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Respondent No. 2 remained in the house of the petitioner and a forged divorce deed was prepared by her she went away with her parents she filed a suit for maintenance allowance and delivery charges Rs. 25,000/-; that petitioner also filed a suit for conjugal rights against Respondent No. 2 when she went to her parents; that petitioner also initiated criminal proceedings for forging a divorce deed; however, suit for maintenance of Respondent No. 2 was decreed at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month for plaintiff Respondent No. 2 Mst. Sajida Mai d/o Ghulam Hussain till the existence of marriage in case of divorce till the period of Iddat and the learned Judge Family Court also fixed Rs. 1000/- per month for the minor Muhammad Noshairwan from the date of institution of the suit till the minor attains majority; that it is pertinent to mention here that petitioner did not assail the judgment and decree of maintenance passed against her by the Judge Family Court and did not bother to file appeal against judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge Family Court, Multan, Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 in whose favour judgment and decree for maintenance allowance was passed filed by the execution proceeding petition of 30.11.2000; during these proceedings the parties started negotiations for reconciliation but all in vain; present petitioner filed objection petition in the executing Court on 30.6.2008; that the Respondent No. 2 filed reply of objection petition; learned Judge/ Executing Court dismissed the objection petition vide order dated 4.6.2009; through this writ petition petitioner is assailing the order dated 04.06.2009 passed by learned Executing Court dismissing the objection petition of the petitioner.

4.  I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

5.  Learned counsel for the petitioner when was confronted that petitioner did not assail judgment and decree of Judge Family Court and did not file an appeal before the District Judge, he candidly confessed that appeal was not filed, as such, the judgment and decree of the learned Judge Family Court attained the status of finality. Relevant para of the impugned order dated 04.06.2009 passed by Judge Family Court is reproduced hereunder:--

"From the perusal of the record it has transpired that the suit for conjugal rights was dismissed by learned Judge Family Court, Mr. Azhar-ul-Haq dated 06.11.2006 in which it was also permission for granted to the plaintiff that he may file the suit for conjugal rights within six month from the date of this judgment. The suit for decree holder on decreed on the same dated on 06.11.09, there is no condition mentioned in the judgment. In this way, the Plaintiff No. 1 is bound to live with the judgment debtor as well as decree Holder No. 2 is minor. The judgment debtor appeared in the Court and did not pay any single penny and did not in stated whether he want to pay the maintenance allowance of the decree Holder No. 2, therefore, prima facie case it looks that the application has been filed just to prolong the matter."

I find no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order dated 04.06.2009 passed by Judge Family Court. Petitioner did not file the appeal against the judgment and decree, thus, the judgment and decree dated 04.06.2009, attained the finality, present objection petition is filed just to prolong the matter to avoid payments, till passing of this order petitioner did not pay single penny to the respondent or his minor son, Muhammad Noshairwan, The Executing Court rightly dismissed.

5.  Resultantly, this writ petition is dismissed in limine.

(R.A.)  Petition dismissed.