Find a Lawyer

Transfer Application No. 392-C of 1983, heard on 14th December, 1983.

---S.25-A--Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), S.24--Transfer of suit- Dominant factor for consideration--Petitioner being Parda-observing lady filed recovery suit and suit for return of custody of minor child against respondent at place T prior to respondent's civil suit filed at place L--Convenience of lady, held, to be regarded as dominant factor in deciding transfer applies n-Respondent's civil suit ordered to be transferred from place L to place T keeping in view convenience of lady.

Irfama Pal v. Javed Akhtar 1982 C L C 7 and Muhammad Ilyas v. Mst. Zarina P L D 1983 Lah. 462 rel.

Jari Ullah Khan for the Petitioner.

Ch. Fazal Ilahi for the Respondent.

Mat. Nusrat Parveen petitioner has brought the present transfer application against her ex-husband Muhammad Hanif respondent, seeking the transfer of the civil suit filed by the said respondent against the petitioner in the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Leiah, for the recovery of Rs.18,500 on account of cost of jewellery etc. which is alleged to have been misappropriated by the petitioner. The transfer is sought to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Toba Tek Singh, where two suits filed by the petitioner against the respondent, one for recovery of a sum of Rs.18,900 on account of cost of items of dowry and the other for the return of custody of Mst. Shugafta Hanif, the minor child of the parties, are pending.

2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that originally she filed a suit for recovery of a sum of Rs.18,900 against the respondent on account of cost of items of her dowry, which have been mis appropriated by the respondent. She had also filed a suit for the return of the custody of Mst. Shugafta Hanif, the minor child of the parties against the respondent. Both these suits were filed by her in the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge, Toba Tek Singh.

3. It is further alleged that as a counter blast respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs.18,500 against the petitioner at Leiah, which is sought to be transferred.

4. It has been pleaded that the petitioner being a lady, it would be highly inconvenient for her to defend the litigation at Leiah.

5. It has been argued on behalf of the respondent that the petitioner happened to be a resourceful lady and she could engage a lawyer and attorney to defend the litigation brought against her at Leiah by the respondent and that the personal inconvenience of the petitioner was no ground for the transfer of the respondent's suit from a Court of competent jurisdiction.

6. It has not been denied that the petitioner is a Parda-observing lady and that she first filed suit against the respondent at Toba Tek Singh, for the recovery of Rs.18,900 on account of cost of items of her dowry. It has also not been contradicted that another case has also been brought by the petitioner against the respondent at Toba Tek Singh, for the return of custody of the minor child of the parties. The respondent has to defend these two suits brought against him by the petitioner at Toba Tek Singh.

7. We cannot also loose sight of the fact that convenience of wife who is a lady has to be regarded as a dominant factor while dealing with transfer applications. In Irfana Pal v. Javed Akhtar 1982 C L C 7 transfer application of the wife was accepted while that of the husband was rejected and it was held that there was no justification for trans ferring the suits filed, by the wife at Rawalpindi to a Court at Gujranwala as convenience of wife is a dominant factor.

8. Similarly, in Muhammad Ilyas v. Mst. Zarina P L D 1983 Lah. 462, it was found that the convenience of the lady litigant (wife) was a dominant factor in deciding a transfer application.

9. In the light of the fore-going observations, the present transfer application is allowed and the suit filed by the respondent against the petitioner titled as Muhammad Hanif v. Nusrat Parveen, for the recovery of Rs.18,500 currently pending before the learned Senior Civil Judge Leiah, is hereby transferred to the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Toba Tek Singh, in whose Court two suits filed by the petitioner against the respondent are already pending. No order is made as to costs.

H.B.T. Application allowed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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