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.
Writ Petition No.4908 of 1983, heard on 23rd October, 1985.
‑‑‑Art.9‑‑Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961), S.9‑‑Divorce‑ Maintenance‑‑Collector setting aside order of Arbitration Council, regarding grant of maintenance allowance to wife on ground that she had been divorced in meantime by husband‑‑No material existing on record to support view of Collector that notice of divorce was duly received by lady and by Union Committee‑‑Case remitted to Arbitration Council for fresh‑ inquiry regarding notice of divorce referred to in order of Collector.
Shah Ahmad Baloch for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Respondent No.3:Ex parte.
Date of hearing: 23rd October, 1985.
A maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs.1,000 per month was granted to the petitioner by the Chairman, Arbitration Council of Union Committee No.10 of Sialkot, vide his order, dated 22‑8‑1982. In revision the learned District Collector, Sialkot set aside the orders of the Arbitration Council on the ground that the petitioner was not entitled to ask for any maintenance as she has been divorced in the meantime by her husband.
2. The respondent No.3, the husband in the case, had to be proceeded ex parte as he did not respond to the notice of this Court and even the notice published in the newspaper.
3. The perusal of the record of the conciliation Court shows that a report was made by the Secretary of the Union Committee on 15‑7‑1982 regarding the notice of divorce referred to in the orders of the Collector. The Secretary was emphatic that no notice was received by the, Union Committee. There is no other material on the record which may support the view of the Collector that on perusal of the file he found that notice of divorce was duly received by the lady and by the Union Committee. The learned counsel has stated that the Collector in all fairness should have ordered the remand of the case to the Union Council for fresh inquiry and not set aside the orders merely on the ground of perusal of the file which, as demonstrated above, does not contain any material supporting the view of the Collector. Under these circumstances it is only fair that the matter is remitted back to the Arbitration Council for fresh inquiry regarding the notice of divorce referred to in the orders of the Collector. Order accordingly. The writ petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
M.Y.H. Case remanded.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer