Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 856 of 1975, decided on 9th February, 1981.
(On petition against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 1‑8‑1975 delivered in Writ Petition No. 1503 of 1975).
‑‑‑ S. 7‑Notice of talrq given by petitioner husband not withdrawn Appeal against decree for restitution of conjugal rights, held, rightly accepted.
S. M. Zamir Zaidi, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 9th February, 1981.
Abdul Baqi and Nayyara Siddiqui were married Mss on 7‑1‑1961 and Rs. 5,000 was fixed as the dower. She lived with him for month where after her husband shifted to her house and lived there for a months. Thereafter they started living separately. On 20‑9‑1971 eight or restitution of conjugal rights, was filed by Abdul Baqi and on a suit f 30‑11‑1971 Nayyara filed, a suit for the payment of her prompt dower. ‑1972 she filed a suit for maintenance. In answer to the suit for On 24 2 the wife alleged that the husband had tried to commit an unnatural restitution offence upon her, had not paid her maintenance and had also not paid her prompt dower where for the prayer for restitution was contested. The two suits for restitution and the suit for dower were consolidated and common issues were framed.
2. On 19‑4‑1975 the suit for dower was decreed. So was the suit for restitution but it was conditional upon the payment of prompt dower. On 29‑5‑1975 the wife appealed against the decree in the suit for restitution and the same was accepted by the learned Additional District Judge, Camp bellpur on the force of the notice of Talaq given by the husband to the wife. The petitioner, therefore, filed a writ petition in the High Court which was dismissed on 1‑3‑1975. Hence this petition for special leave to appeal.
3. It has been submitted before us that Notice of Talaq was withdrawn ‑1974. As pointed out by the learned Additional District Judge in paragraph 8 of the judgment, there is not even an iota of evidence on the record which points to the withdrawal of the notice of Talaq given by the petitioner. The learned Additional District Judge was, here fore, right in, that the learned Civil Judge wrongly ignored it and should not have in the circumstances passed the decree for restitution of conjugal rights. Moreover having found that the petitioner wanted to subject Nayyara to unnatural intercourse, the learned Judge had no option but to decline to, affirm the decree for restitution. He therefore, rightly accepted the appeal. We find no fault with the order of the learned High Court and would, therefore, dismiss this petition for special leave to appeal.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer