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 No. 29‑R of 1983, decided on 23rd October, 1983.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, passed in Writ Petition No. 3036 of 1979).
Art. 185 (3)‑Concurrent finding of fact by lower Courts not interfered by High Court‑Petitioner unable to dispute correctness of finding‑Order of High Court not interfered with being un exception‑
Samad Mahmood Advocate Supreme Court (Absent) instructed by Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 23rd January, 1983.
‑In this petition the dispute relates to the recovery of dower debt about which it was alleged that it was paid through a bank on 15th of February, 1975, at Lahore. The trial Court held that the bank transaction was fake as she was not t1le recipient of the amount withdrawn from the bank.
On appeal the Additional District Judge, Rawalpindi, affirmed this finding upon an appraisal of evidence on record. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner challenged this finding in the Lahore High Court through a constitution petition, but did not succeed, as the High Court did not interfere with the concurrent finding of fact. The learned counsel for the petitioner was not able to seriously dispute the correctness of this finding. Accordingly, we see no justification to interfere with the order of the High Court, which is unexceptionable.
The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
M. Z. M. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer