MALIK HASHIM AMIR KHAN versus MST. SAADIA TABASSUM
Article 5, Schedule Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Appeal The plaintiff's position for the recovery of gold jewelry by the wife was that at her marriage, 21 gold jewelry was given to her which the defendant (husband) Had kept The defendant claimed that the earlier suit for retrieval of gold jewelry was withdrawn and another case was dismissed for the recovery of articles on dowry and bridal gifts and the present case was not retained. The suit was dismissed at the hearing, but the same decision was reversed with a statement by the defendant's counsel stating that the appellate court's validation suit for the recovery of 21 gold jewelery was retrieved. That there is no need to follow this case nor enter into any agreement nor this statement I have mentioned this. Plaintiff's counsel's statement in favor of the plaintiff includes the authority to make a statement on behalf of the party In retaliation in the same case for recovering the articles of the dowry, gifts of Rs. 3,95,000 were also claimed and The case was also decided on a merit, if the plaintiff applicant had any other ornament or personal affinity with the plaintiff, the appellate court had previously considered the statement of the plaintiff's lawyer and the second case on the merits. Also claimed that he had ignored the dismissal of the case and had erred in overturning a reasonable trial decision. That should have been the claim. And failed to perform his duties as required by law and the appellate court's decision was found to be law.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2015
