2005 Y L R 1518
Suit for recovery of deferred dower---Limitation---Husband (defendant) resisted suit contending that he having pronounced a valid Talaq to the plaintiff three years before institution of the suit, suit filed by her was barred by time---Family Court decreed suit in favour of plaintiff, but Appellate Court reversed judgment of Family Court and found that suit was barred in view of Art.104 of Limitation Act, 1908---Validity---Prior to present suit, plaintiff had filed suit for recovery of maintenance allowance and defendant in his written statement had pleaded that he had pronounced divorce on plaintiff on 8-1-1990---Plaintiff, admittedly was not present at the time of alleged pronouncement, of divorce by defendant and written statement in the suit was filed by defendant on 16-7-1990 and judgment in the suit was pronounced on 24-11-1992---Pronouncement of divorce on 8-1-1990 was not proved to be backed by any notice of divorce or to have become effective through Arbitration Council---Divorce on plaintiff at the most would become effective on the date of pronouncement of judgment in the case which was 24-11-1992---Mere plea taken by defendant in written statement that divorce had been pronounced some time in the past, could not, by itself, be treated as effecting Talaq on the date of delivery of copy of written statement to plaintiff wife---Art.104 of Limitation Act, 1908 for deferred dower, had provided period of three years from date when marriage was dissolved by divorce and marriage would be considered to be dissolved only when it came to notice of plaintiff wife---Judgment in earlier suit was pronounced on 24-11-1992 in which Court had found that plaintiff had been divorced---Plaintiff having accepted said judgment, period of limitation provided under Art.104 of Limitation Act, 1908 would run from the said date 24-11-1992---Present suit filed by plaintiff on 14-6-1994 which was within prescribed period of three years, was within time.
0 comments:
Post a Comment