Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 220 of 1984/BWP, decided on 2nd December, 1984.

---S. 8--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--Khula'--Wife categorically stating that she apprehended danger to her life at hands of husband and she was not prepared at all to live with husband--Dissolution of marriage on ground of Khula', held, justified in circum stances.

---S. 8--Marriage benefits--Money taken by father of wife from her husband and ornaments taken away by wife while leaving house of husband, held, could not be termed as marriage benefits got by wife at the time marriage.

Syed Iqbal-ud-Din Shah for Petitioner.

Muhammad Akbar for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 2nd December, 1984.

Through this Constitutional petition Ghulam Muhammad petitioner wants this Court to declare judgment and decree, dated 29-4-1984 passed by Judge Family Court, Hasilpur to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.

2. The facts giving rise to this petition briefly are that on 28-2-1982 Mst. Noor Bibi respondent No.1 filed suit for dissolution of her marriage against Ghulam Muhammad petitioner on various grounds including that of Khula.The suit was resisted whereon five issues were framed. The parties produced their evidence. On the conclusion of the hearing the trial Court decreed the suit on the strength of issue No.4 which is as under:-

Whether plaintiff is entitled to Khula' If so on what terms O.P.P.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that question of Khula has not been considered properly and that the decree for the dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula has been granted without return of benefits to the petitioner/husband. Conversely the learned counsel for the respondent supported the judgment of the Court.

3. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I have not been able to persuade myself to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner. I find that the learned Judge Family Court has applied his conscious mind to the evidence on record and attending circumstances for deciding issue No.4. Mst. Noor Bibi the respondent categorically stated that she apprehends danger to her life at hands of the petitioner/husband and that she was not prepared at all to live with the petitioner/husband. While discussing issue No.3 regarding the marriage benefits the Judge Family Court observed that the petitioner/defendant could not show on record that the plaintiff had got any marriage benefits from him at the time of marriage. Learned counsel for the petitioner is not in a position to controvert this observation. He submitted that the father of the respondent/wife had taken Rs.3,000 from the petitioner and that while leaving the house of the petitioner the respondent/wife took away some ornaments etc. which should have been returned to the petitioner/ husband. I am afraid the money taken by the father and the ornaments' if any taken away by the wife while leaving the house cannot be termed marriage benefits got by the wife at the time of marriage. The learned Judge Family Court has appreciated the evidence in accordance with the principles laid down by the superior Courts. He has not flouted any provisions of law.

4. For what has been stated above, it is not a fit case for interference with the judgment and decree of the Judge Family Court while sitting in the exercise of the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. The petition is dismissed. The parties are however left to bear their own costs.

H.B.T. Writ refused.