- Rule Nisi --- Change of faith --- Marriage without divorce --- Recovery of wife --- Petition to Court --- Procedure --- Petitioner's wife converted to Islam and contracted marriage with respondent without waiting for Iddat ( intervening period ) -

 PLD 2023 SINDH 53

Sindh Hindus Marriage ( Amendment ) Act ( XLIX of 2018 ) --- -Ss.11 & 14 --- Criminal Procedure Code ( V of 1898 ) , S. 561 - A --- Rule Nisi --- Change of faith --- Marriage without divorce --- Recovery of wife --- Petition to Court --- Procedure --- Petitioner's wife converted to Islam and contracted marriage with respondent without waiting for Iddat ( intervening period ) --- Petitioner sought recovery of his wife and two minor daughters --- High Court sent the wife to Darul Amann to remain there till that decision of petition --- Validity --- High Court declared marriage with respondent contracted during Iddat period was Fasid ( irregular ) and not Batil ( void ) and released the wife from Darul Amman and she could enter into Nikkah with respondent a fresh , if she so wished --- High Court declared that if a married , non - Muslim woman embraced Islam , she was to file petition in Family Court for termination dissolution of marriage and Family Court would summon her husband , inform him of her conversion , and would offer him to accept Islam , Family Court then would wait till expiry of her Iddat period for reply / decision of her husband --- High Court further directed that if husband in response to offer embraced Islam within the period of Iddat , the marriage would continue but if he remained non - Muslim even after expiry of Iddat period , the Court could pass a decree of termination / dissolution of marriage and the woman , thereafter , would be free to marry a Muslim man if so , wished --- High Court further directed that Iddat was compulsory after dissolution of marriage of any character and Iddat was imposed in order to provide an opportunity to non - Muslim husband to consider whether he wished to embrace Islam and also as a matter of public policy in order to ascertain whether the woman was pregnant by earlier husband , so as to avoid confusion of parentage --- Family Court in case in such petition filed by women , fresh convert to Islam , [ or a petition filed by parents or any guardian pleading forced marriage of their 18 years ) daughter ] would proceed to underage ( below determine on evidence in each case whether the conversion or marriage was prima facie genuine ( and was not forced ) , or only a pretext and decide accordingly --- In the first case , findings would operate as a defense against criminal prosecution and in the latter , it would make the perpetrator of act , offender of law

Family suit involving child---Minor daughter of the parties not arrayed as a plaintiff in the suit---Whether Family court is competent to grant a decree in favour of such minor---

 2023 SCMR 413

Family suit involving child---Minor daughter of the parties not arrayed as a plaintiff in the suit---Whether Family court is competent to grant a decree in favour of such minor---Held, that in the present case, it was very much convenient for the Family Court to ask for the suitable amendments in the plaint or it could have itself impleaded the child as a plaintiff along with his mother and other siblings---However, in the given circumstances, there was no miscarriage of justice or that the case could have a different result if the child was technically impleaded as a party to the suit in formal manner---Disposal and settlement of Family dispute should not take the form and contents of adjudication---Wherever, there is a procedural convenience, subject to the command of the statute, it must be resolved in favour of the women and children---Though the name of minor daughter has not been mentioned in the array of plaintiffs independently but in the body of the plaint her case for grant of maintenance has been clearly pleaded and further in the prayer clause specific maintenance allowance for the minor daughter has been sought by the plaintiff-mother

Suit for recovery of dower --- Jirga decision , validity of --- Scope --- Petitioner filed suit for recovery of dower in the shape of gold ornaments and maintenance for the period of iddat -

 2023 MLD 279

Suit for recovery of dower --- Jirga decision , validity of --- Scope --- Petitioner filed suit for recovery of dower in the shape of gold ornaments and maintenance for the period of iddat --- Trial Court decreed the suit whereas Appellate Court dismissed the suit to the extent of dower and decreed the same to the extent of maintenance allowance --- Validity --- Jirga proceedings were the bone of contention between the parties --- Petitioner had alleged that no gold ornaments in lieu of dower were given to her while , on the contrary , respondent had claimed that all issues were settled in the jirga --- One of the attesting witnesses of jirga proceedings had supported the petitioner by stating that no ornaments were given to the petitioner pursuant to the jirga proceedings rather only an amount of Rs . 1 lac had been paid to her --- Respondent was required to prove the contents of affidavit signed during jirga proceedings by producing at least two marginal witnesses of the document but no such efforts were made --- Settlement through the intervention of members of the locality was not approved by any court of law , therefore , it could not be said that the petitioner was bound by its terms and conditions as a force of law nor she was compelled to do so --- Constitutional petition was allowed , judgment and decree passed by Appellate Court set aside and that of Trial Court was restored , in circumstances .

Whether the interim order, passed in a guardian petition filed by the respondent which was consolidated with the guardian petition filed by the petitioner, holds the field after the guardian petition filed by the respondent was dismissed as withdrawn?

 (i) Whether the interim order, passed in a guardian petition filed by the respondent which was consolidated with the guardian petition filed by the petitioner, holds the field after the guardian petition filed by the respondent was dismissed as withdrawn?

(ii) If the above referred interim order dated 11.05.2019 directing the petitioner to ensure presence of the minor before the US Embassy for preparation of passport of the latter is holding the field, whether the same is required to be implemented being in welfare of the minor?

Writ Petition No.6959 of 2022
Amraf Butt Versus Imran Bashir, etc.
Date of Hearing:09.03.2023









Admittedly Nikah between the parties was orally solemnized according to Shariah. Under the Quranic teachings the relations ................

 Admittedly Nikah between the parties was orally solemnized according to Shariah. Under the Quranic teachings the relations of a Muslim family unit (spouse) is established through solemnization of Nikah in order to determine the rights / obligations of a husband and wife and it is made mandatory for a husband to give dower to his wife. Quantum of the dower amount has been left open for the parties to settle the same according to their independent opinion. In case the amount of dower is not mentioned in that eventuality a modus operandi is provided in Shariah to ascertain the same from the customs, status and allied social traits of the parties. The such settlement or determination of dower amount is named as proper dower (Mehr-e-Misl).

Writ Petition-Family-Maintenance :4024-21
WAHID BAKHSH VS ADJ ETC
Mr. Justice Ch. Muhammad Iqbal
15-03-2021
2021 LHC 688

Article 103 speaks about the time period of three years by a muslim for exigible dower (mu’ajjal) “when the dower is demanded and refused or where, during...........

 Article 103 speaks about the time period of three years by a muslim for exigible dower (mu’ajjal) “when the dower is demanded and refused or where, during the continuance of the marriage no such demand has been made when the marriage is dissolved by death or divorce.” Whereas Article 104 speaks about the time period of three years by a muslim for deferred dower (mu’wajjal) “when the marriage is dissolved by death or divorce.” Admittedly, the property was in the exclusive possession of the respondent and the tenants were also paying Ijjara to her. The respondent never said that she did not receive the dower rather it was her claim that she is enjoying the proceeds/fruit of the land. Therefore, the matter in-fact related to wrong entries in the revenue record and the same in no way can be termed as a matter relating to dower. The learned High Court by placing reliance on the judgment of this Court reported as Abdul Sattar Khan Vs. Rafiq Khan (2000 SCMR 1574) and Articles 120 and 144 of the Qanun-e-Shahdat Order, 1984 has rightly held that the period of six years is to be counted from the date when the right to sue accrued. In these circumstances, neither the suit of the respondent can be termed as barred by time nor she had to approach the learned Family Court for redressal of her grievances. The learned High Court has rightly held that respondent was a Parda Nashin Lady and under no circumstances it can be presumed that she had the knowledge that after the Nikah and the Nikah Nama, the registration as well as the incorporation in the revenue record was mandatory. Under the bona fide belief, in our part of the world, the presumption of completeness of transaction, after the execution of Nikah Nama is there and since the Ijjara was being received by her, as such, she was under bona fide belief that during the lifetime of Noor Muhammad as well as after his death, the transaction is complete and she is the owner of the property in question.”

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 23-P OF 2017
Pirzada Noor-ul-Basar vs Mst. Pakistan Bibi and others
29-03-2023








When the appeal of the respondent was clearly time barred and the question of limitation was not addressed by the learned Appellate Court below and the matter.............

 When the appeal of the respondent was clearly time barred and the question of limitation was not addressed by the learned Appellate Court below and the matter was remanded, such a remand order is error apparent on the face of the record and constitutional petition is, therefore, maintainable.

Family
16930/20
Beenish . Vs Adj etc
01-03-2023
2023 LHC 975











Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Powered by Blogger.

Case Law Search