Unless possession of the immovable property constituting dower of a wife is given to her, and/or the share of the produce thereof is paid, in essence, the obligation to pay the dower has not been discharged by the husband

Unless possession of the immovable property constituting dower of a wife is given to her, and/or the share of the produce thereof is paid, in essence, the obligation to pay the dower has not been discharged by the husband, which precisely is the position in the present case. The conduct of the petitioner of delaying the payment of the agreed dower and denying possession of the dower property and/or usufruct in form of the produce thereof, on the ingenuine and shallow plea that he was obligated only to transfer the land and not the possession reveals the contumacious conduct of the petitioner as to further protract and linger on the matter by involving, rather dragging, the respondent in uncalled for litigation that cannot be countenanced by this Court in constitutional jurisdiction.