Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
[Lahore]
Before Mahboob Ahmad, J
Mst. REHANA BI BI--Petitioner
versus
MUHAMMAD BOOTA--Respondent
Transfer Application No. 305/C of 1985 decided on 18th January, 1986
---S. 25-A--Transfer of suit--Suit for dissolution of marriage at L- Suit for restitution of conjugal rights at G--Suit for dissolution of marriage prior in time than other suit--Petitioner being woman apprehending danger of bodily harm--Suits involving common question of law--In order to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of judgment, both suits, held, should be tried by one and same Court in interest of justice Suit Tor-restitution restitution of conjugal rights pending at G was, therefore, transferred to L.
Muhammad Sarwar for Petitioner. .
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 21st December 1985.
This petition under section 25-A of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 seeks transfer of suit for restitution of conjugal rights titled "Muhammad Boota v. Rehana Bibi" pending in the Court of Khawaja Hassan Wali Khan, Judge Family Court Gujranwala to the Court of Mr. Shafqat Ahmad, Judge Family Court Lahore, before whom the petitioners suit for dissolution of marriage against the respondent is pending.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends:
First,
that the suit of the petitioner against the respondent for dissolution of marriage was instituted on 12th of February, 1985 and that the respondent filed the suit for restitution of conjugal rights against the petitioner at Gujranwala as a counterblast on 24th of February, 1985;
Secondly,
that the petitioner is a woman and apprehends that she will be put to inconvenience and may also be subjected to bodily harm if she is to go to Gujranwala to defend herself there;
Thirdly,
that the respondent will in any case have to come to Lahore to defend himself in the suit for dissolution of marriage filed by the petitioner against him as he has not sought transfer of her suit; and
Lastly,
that the two suits involve common questions of law and fact and, therefore, it will be in the interest of justice and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and conflict of judgments that the same are tried by one and the same Court.
3. No one has appeared for the respondent despite service. He has been proceeded against ex parte.
4. The contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner have force, especially when they are going unrebutted from the side of the respondent and also find support from the precedent case law on the subject of transfer of suits arising under the Family Courts Act.
5. In view of the foregoing position, allowing this application I direct that the suit for restitution of conjugal rights titled "Muhammad Boots. v. Rehana Bibi" be withdrawn from the Court of Khawaja Hassan Wali Khan, Judge Family Court Gujranwala and entrusted to the Court of Mr. Shafqat Ahmad, Judge Family Court Lahore for adjudication in accordance with law.
There will, however, be no order as to costs.
6. The parties shall appear before the Judge Family Court at Lahore in the suit for dissolution of marriage on 18th January, 1986.
7. The learned transferee Court at Lahore shall ensure that in future same dates. of hearing are fixed in the two suits to avoid inconvenience to the respondent.
8. The Court from which the suit for restitution of conjugal rights has been withdrawn shall ensure that the record of the case reaches the transferee Court well in advance of the date fixed above viz. 18- 1-1986.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer