ABDUL REHMAN vs Mst. HAKIM and another
This constitutional petition was filed against the judgment of the Civil and Family Judge allowing a Khula application and dissolving the marriage between the parties. The core legal question revolved around whether the family court could decree a dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula after framing issues when the wife offered to return the disputed dower amount, and whether such procedure violated the provisions of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964. The Sindh High Court dismissed the petition, holding that where a wife seeking Khula offers to deposit or return the disputed dower amount, the court is fully empowered to dissolve the marriage to prevent undue delay and avoid letting frivolous dower claims defeat the statutory objective of expeditious relief. Furthermore, the Court held that the petition suffered from strict laches having been filed after a delay of fourteen months. The key principle laid down is that procedural technicalities regarding framing of issues or disputes over dower should not impede the immediate grant of Khula once the wife is willing to surrender the dower benefit.
- Can a family court decree dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula after framing issues if the wife offers to return the dower amount?
- Whether a frivolous claim for dower can be used to defeat the remedy of Khula under the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964?
- Is a constitutional petition against a family court judgment maintainable after an unexplained delay of fourteen months?
- Section 10, West Pakistan Family Courts Act 1964
ORDER
1. ' ZIA PERWAZ, J.---This petition is directed against the impugned Judgment dated 10-12-2005 of 2nd Civil Judge and Family Judge, Pano Akil allowing Khula' application registered under F.C. Suit No,1 of 2005.
2. ' Marriage of the petitioner with Mst. Hakim, respondent No,1 was solemnized in the year, 1999. Dower amount was fixed at Rs,1,000. Pre-trial took place but failed on 8-3-2005. A demand of return of dower initially respondent No,1 denied to have received Rs,1,000, therefore, learned trial Court proceeded with the framing of issues. However, on 25-10-2005 application was submitted on behalf of respondent No,1 for return of dower amount on the ground that in case trial was conducted it would be time consuming.
3. ' Contention of learned counsel is that after having framed the issues the trial Court could not have disposed of the case vide impugned judgment on the basis of application for allowing Khula' immediately after failure of pre-trail within the meaning of proviso 4 of section 10 of the West Pakistanis Family Courts Act, 1964.
4. ' Heard learned counsel and perused the record. The proviso 4 to section 10 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 reads as follows:-- "If no compromise or reconciliation is possible the Court shall frame the issues in the case and fix date for the recording of the evidence."
5. The only contention provided for dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula' is the return of amount of dower, which was the only bone of contention in the above case. The object. Of this amendment to the Family Courts Act, 1964 is to avoid delay in proceedings and to afford right and remedy available to the applicants seeking Khula' expeditiously.
6. ' As to the question of framing the issues, the issues are framed by the Court. The Court has power to amend, modify and even reframe the issues at any stage of the proceedings. The provisions of law are to be interpreted as in the manner as not, o defeat the very object of the statute. In the instant case the object is to provide the specific remedy without any undue delay so as not to keep the wife in a state where she may be deprived of her right to remarry while she is of marriageable age in addition to the mental agony and tension which is the objective to meet the ends of justice in the light of enactment.
7. ' The arguments advanced before the Court are rather against this very principle. The application moved by the counsel for the applicant to payment/deposit the disputed amount of dower to Khula' is not barred by any law. In such cases even if the respondent disputes receipt of dower the applicant seeking relief by way of Khula' may deposit the amount of alleged dower in the Court and the Court under the circumstances is required to allow dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula' pending final decision regarding controversy of the amount of dower to be adjudicated upon at later stage otherwise even a frivolous claim for dower amount would become a tool to defeat the very objective for which the remedy is provided and thus defeat the purpose of the statute.
8. ' Under the circumstances, no ground valid for interfering with impugned judgment is made out.
9. The impugned judgment was announced on 10-12-2005 and challenged by the above petitioner after a period of 14 months which is even otherwise not maintainable as it suffers from the latches.
10. ' For the foregoing reasons, this petition is dismissed in limine.
Cited by 4 cases
- Tariq vs State & 1 another 2017 PHC 582
- TARIQ vs The STATE and another 2018 YLR 578
- MUDASSAR BUTT vs JUDGE FAMILY COURT, LAHORE and another 2010 CLC 1729
- REHAN IQBAL BALOOCH vs PRESIDING OFFICER and 2 others 2009 MLD 998