Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

SAMINA ABID versus ABID RAZA SAMI


West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 Section 25 Family Case Transfer Husband filed suit for restoration of marital rights against his wife S. Wife subsequently filed suit for restoration of witch against her husband S. Wife Due to the inconvenience of requesting the transfer of the husband's case to the place, L refused to exchange the husband's suit to keep L in such a situation as the wife himself had filed the suit for Dover's recovery. Family Court was chosen.

1985 C L C 2685

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Afzal Lone, J

SAMINA ABID--Petitioner

Versus

ARID RAZA SAMI--Respondent

Transfer Application No. 239/C of 1984, decided on 2nd March, 1985.

West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--

---S. 25-A--Transfer of family case--Husband filed suit for restitution of conjugal rights against wife at place S--Wife later on filed suit for recovery of dower against husband at place S--Wife sought transfer of husband's suit at place L on ground of inconvenience--Court refused transfer of husband's suit from place S to place L in circumstances as wife herself chose Family Court at place S for filing suit for recovery of dower.

Ch. Asghar Ali Bhatti for Petitioner.

Tariq Javed for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 2nd March, 1985.

JUDGMENT

Through this application, a suit for restitution of conjugal rights, filed by the respondent against the applicant, under hearing in the learned Family Court Sialkot, is, sought to be transferred to some Family Court based at Lahore.

2. In support of this application it is argued that the applicant resides at Lahore and her brother who is only male member of her family is serving in the army and posted at Rahimyar Khan, she apprehends mischief at the hands of the respondent in case she, visits Sialkot, to defend the suit.

3. The learned counsel for the respondent opposes the application. He argued that after the filing of the suit for restitution of conjugal rights, the applicant herself instituted a suit against the respondent, in the Family Court Sialkot for recovery of dower, which is still under hearing. In his submission, this institution, completely negatives the applicant's stand. The allegation that she would be maltreated has

also been controverted,

4. The filing of the suit in the Family Court Sialkot for recovery of dower, is, not denied by the learned counsel for the applicant. He, however, submits that it is being conducted through an attorney and the hearing having been completed it is now fixed for arguments and orders.

5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am not inclined to allow this application. The applicant herself chose Family Court Sialkot for filing the suit for recovery of dower and that too after the institution of his suit by the respondent. A little bit of inconvenience is inevitable in the litigation. I see no good ground to transfer the respondent's suit to the Lahore Court. This application, therefore, dismissed but with no order as to costs.

H .B.T. Application dismissed.

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.