Find a Lawyer

‑‑‑ S. 17‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199‑Res Judicata Family Court decreeing second suit for dissolution of marriage holding that principle of res judicata not applicable‑View, held, not correct‑While admitting writ petition operation of im pugned decree suspended restraining lady from remarrying‑Such order not served upon lady who contracting second marriage giving birth to a child and gone out of country‑Writ petition dis missed in circumstances of case.

Ch. Azimuddin for Petitioner.

Muhammad Zahid Abbasi for Respondent No. 2.

Dates of hearing : 24th November and 11th December, 1982.

This writ petition assailing the validity of the judgment and decree of the learned Judge, Family Court, Faisalabad, respondent 1, passed on the 17th April, 1980, dissolving the petitioner's marriage with respondent 2. arises out of the following circumstances. Abdur Razzaq, petitioner, was married to Ust. Parveen Akhtar, respondent 2, on the 10th June, 1977. Respondent 2 instituted suit for dissolution of marriage against the petitioner on the 18th January, 1978. The suit was dismissed on the 10th June, 1979. She brought another suit substantially on the same allegation for getting her marriage dissolved on the 21st July, 1979. The petitioner resisted the suit, inter alia, on the ground that the dismissal of the former suit operated as res judicata to the new suit. However, the learned trial Judge was of the view that the principle of res judicata did not apply to family suits. He decreed the suit on merits. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner invoked the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court.

2. On the 11th June, 1980, while admitting the writ petition this Court suspended the operation of the impugned decree, Never- the less, respondents 2 was not served with any order of the Court touching suspension of the operation of the decree or restraining her from re‑marrying. Slte actually re‑married on the 24th April, 1981, and has given birth to a child. She is reported to be living at the moment in Saudi Arabia.

3. Though in face of the provisions of section 17 of the Family Courts Act. 1964, it is not possible to endorse the learned trial Judge's view that the principle of res judlcata was not applicable to the family suits yet in view of respondent 2's having gone into marriage and having already borne a child without any fault on her part it would not be in the fitness of things to issue any writ. Consequently this petition fails and is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

M. A. K. Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.