Find a Lawyer

HAMID HAMEED WARIS versus MST. TEHSEEN

Section 5 of the West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 and Schedule dissolution of Muslim marriages Act (VIII of 1939), Article 2 (viii) (ix) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitution to dissolve marriage on the basis of persecution Trial. The husband had verbally told his wife three times during his interrogation that she wanted Khulla as a substitute and she was ready to leave Dwyer's money because she could not live with her husband in God's limits. The Thai Family Court ruled the case because of the atrocities. That the only remedy for the wife was through Khulla, but the Family Court, traveling beyond its jurisdiction, passed the order of cruelty in the absence of any such issue, in a written statement to the legitimate husband and Admitted that he had divorced her. There is no need for the wife to have a case of cruelty in such circumstances three times if such decision could not be made, then such a case could be presented. Mentioning the husband's attitude in relation to the cruelty in a divorce decision three times did not mean that the family court ruled on that basis, that the wife had some grounds to dissolve her marriage. If the divorce was not divorced, the issue of cruelty could have been made compulsory. If the wife came to court on the grounds that the wife could easily come to court, then only three times by her husband, the verbal divorce. It is not possible for the wife to survive in order to confirm the declaration. Constitutional application dismissed in device female advocates from Kalar Syedian lawyer