حق مہر مقرر کرتے وقت سسر یا دادا سسر ضامن بنےہوں تو، وہ بھی ادائیگی کے پابندہوں گے۔ حق مہر ادا نا ہوا ہو، بیوی آباد ہونے سے انکاری ہو تو وہ نافرمان نہیں کہلائے گی۔

 2020 M L D 1091
[Peshawar]
Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---

----S. 5, Sched.---Suit for recovery of dower and maintenance allowance---Principles---Payment of dower on behalf of grandfather---Scope---Dower deed---Proof of---Grandfather of defendant-husband promised to transfer landed property as a dower in favour of wife of his grandson through dower deed---Contention of defendant-husband was that he had not executed dower deed in favour of plaintiff-wife---Suit was decreed concurrently---Validity---Scribe and marginal witnesses of dower deed had expired but plaintiff-wife had substantiated the execution of the dower deed by producing sons of said deceased witnesses---Entire dower as per dower deed was outstanding against the defendant-husband---Grandfather of defendant being his elder agreed to transfer landed property to the wife of his grandson through dower deed which had his signature and he stood surety for the same---Property which had been mentioned in the dower deed as dower for plaintiff even if it did not belong to the defendant should be transferred to the wife---Father or grandfather could transfer movable as well as immovable property as dower on the eve of marriage of his son/grandson---If anyone had stood surety or had guaranteed the payment of dower then he was as much party and liable to pay the same as bridegroom himself---Presence of wife at the time of execution of dower deed/agreement was not necessary as same was not a commercial transaction---Marriage in the present case was arranged one and its terms and conditions had been settled amongst elders of the families---Dower deed had been proved on behalf of plaintiff-wife---Grandfather of defendant had expired and inheritance mutation to the extent of share of plaintiff was illegal and void---Wife had right to refuse conjugal rights of her husband in case of non-payment of dower---Desertion of plaintiff in her parents' house could not be considered as her disobedience when her dower was outstanding against the husband---Defendant was bound to maintain his children and disclose his financial status before the Family Court---Defendant had not disclosed his earning which showed that maintenance allowance fixed by the Courts below was within his means---Family Court had discretion to grant annual increase in the maintenance allowance---No mis-reading or non-reading of evidence had been pointed out in the impugned judgments passed by the Courts below---Constitutional petition was dismissed in limine, in circumstances.

Mst. Shumaila Bibi v. Zahir Khan and 3 others PLD 2015 Pesh. 182; Muhammad Anwar Khan v. Sabia Khanam and another PLD 2010 Lah. 119; Maj. Rifat Nawaz and 5 others v. Mst. Tahira and 2 others 2008 CLC 803; Mst. Shehnaz Akhtar v. Fida Hussain and 2 others 2007 CLC 1517; Mst. Maryam Haseena and 3 others v. Syed Ejaz Hussain Shah and 3 others 2011 MLD 176; Sardar Arshid Hussain's case 2017 SCMR 608 and Muhammad Asim's case PLD 2018 SC 819 rel.