ASHFAQ AHMAD vs JUDGE, FAMILY COURT OKARA and another
The petitioner challenged an interlocutory order passed by the Family Court, Okara, which had closed his right to file a written statement in a pending suit for recovery of maintenance allowance and dower amount. The core legal question was whether the High Court should exercise its writ jurisdiction to interfere with such an interlocutory order during the pendency of trial proceedings. The Lahore High Court dismissed the petition, holding that it is not the function of the Court in writ jurisdiction to micromanage proceedings or interfere with interlocutory orders in a pending trial. The Court reasoned that the petitioner has an adequate alternative remedy available, as he may challenge the impugned order in an appeal should the final judgment in the suit be decided against him. The principle laid down is that writ jurisdiction is not appropriate for correcting interlocutory procedural orders when a wider appellate remedy exists, thereby discouraging premature interference in ongoing trial court proceedings.
- Should the High Court exercise writ jurisdiction to interfere with interlocutory orders passed during the pendency of a trial?
- Is the closure of the right to file a written statement by a Family Court an order that can be challenged through a writ petition?
- Does the availability of an appellate remedy preclude the exercise of writ jurisdiction against an interlocutory order?
ORDER
JAWWAD. S. KHAWAJA, J.---The respondent-plaintiff Naseem Akhtar has filed a suit for recovery of maintenance allowance and dower amount against the petitioner-defendant Ashfaq Ahmad, which is pending adjudication. The petitioner did not file his written statement, whereupon the learned Family Court, vide order dated 3-10-2006, closed his right to file a written statement. The petitioner, impugns this order. It is not for this Court while exercising writ jurisdiction to interfere in interlocutory orders and to micromanage proceedings in a pending trial. Needless to say, if the suit is decided against the petitioner and the petitioner chooses to file an appeal, it will be open to him to assail the order dated 3-10-2006 in his appeal. The appellate jurisdiction, being wider in scope than writ jurisdiction, in the circumstances, provides an adequate remedy to the petitioner-defendant.
2. In view of the above discussion, IB this petition is dismissed.
Cited by 6 cases
- Muhammad Kashif vs Additional District Judge and 3 Others 2022 MLD 1995
- Mst. SHUMAILA BIBI Versus JUDGE FAMILY COURT 2010 YLR 3167
- MUHAMMAD NASIR vs NASEEM AKHTAR 2010 MLD 1337
- NASIR AHMED vs Mst. NASEEM AKHTAR and 2 others 2010 YLR 1746
- Mian KASHIF MAHMOOD-UL-HASSAN vs JUDGE FAMILY COURT, KAROR and 2 2010 MLD 692
- Mian KASHIF MEHMOOD-UL-HASSAN vs JUDGE FAMILY COURT etc 2010 PLJ Lahore 400