Find a Lawyer

Transfer Application No.173‑C of 1986, decided on 2nd June, 1986.

---‑S.25‑A‑‑Transfer ok suit‑‑Petitioner wife instituted suit for dissolution marriage against husband prior in time at place where marriage of spouses was performed‑‑ Respondent husband subsequently instituted suit for restitution of conjugal rights against wife at different place‑‑Common questions of law and fact were likely to arise in both suits To avoid conflict of judgments, two suits were required to be tried by one and same Court‑Husband's suit for restitution of conjugal rights was ordered to be transferred to place where wife's suit for dissolution of marriage against husband was pending.

Muhammad Jamil Akhtar for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 2nd June, 1986.

This petition under section 25‑A of the Family Courts Act, 1964 seeks the transfer of the suit for restitution of conjugal rights titled "Arif v. Mst, Nasim Akhtar" from the Court of Ch. Riaz Ahmad, Judge Family Court, Sheikhupura to the Court of Sardar Muhammad Rana, Judge Family Court, Sargodha before whom the petitioner's suit for dissolution of marriage against the respondent is pending.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the suit of the respondent filed at Sheikhupura is counterblast to the suit of the petitioner against the respondent. He submits that after the petitioner had filed the suit for dissolution of marriage the respondent instituted the suit at Sheikhupura only to cause harassment to the petitioner.

3. He further contends that in both the suits common questions of law and fact are likely to arise and, therefore, to avoid conflict of judgments, the two suits should be tried by one and the same Court.

4. The learned counsel has also contended that the marriage of the parties having been performed at Sargodha to which place the petitioner had to return on falling out with the respondent, the two suits are triable at Sargodha.

5. The respondent has not appeared to contest this petition and has been proceeded against ex parte. The contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner are, therefore, going unrebutted. Otherwise also they appear to have force.

In view of the foregoing, allowing this petition I direct that the suit for restitution of conjugal rights titled "Arif v. Mst. Nasim Akhtar" be withdrawn from the Court of Ch. Riaz Ahmad, Judge Family Court, Sheikhupura and entrusted to the Court of Mr. Sardar Muhammad Rana, Judge Family Court, Sargodha for adjudication in accordance with law.

Since the respondent has not appeared to contest this petition, there will be no order as to costs.

6. The parties shall appear before the transferee Court on 28^th June, 1986.

7. The Court from which the suit has been withdrawn shall ensure that the record of the case reaches the transferee Court well in advance of the date fixed above.

8. The transferee Court shall, after 28th June, 1986, fix the same dates of hearing in both the suits between the parties to avoid inconvenience to them.

H.B.T. Petition 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.