MUHAMMAD SABIR vs Mst. AZRA BIBI and 2 others
This constitutional petition arises out of a pending suit for recovery of dowry articles filed under the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, wherein the petitioner's defence was struck off by the Family Court and his subsequent revision was dismissed by the Additional District Judge on the ground of maintainability. The core legal question addressed by the High Court is whether an interim or interlocutory order passed by a Family Court can be challenged before the High Court through a constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The Lahore High Court dismissed the writ petition in limine, holding that interlocutory orders of Family Courts cannot be challenged through a writ petition under Article 199, just as appeals and revisions are barred under section 14(3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964. The key principle laid down is that an aggrieved party must await the final decree in the family suit to challenge any interim orders.
- Whether an interim order passed by a Family Court can be challenged through a constitutional petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan?
- Are appeal and revision competent against an interlocutory order passed under the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964?
- What is the appropriate remedy for a party aggrieved by an interim order passed in a family suit?
- Section 14(3), West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964
- Article 199, Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan
ORDER
SYED AKHLAQ AHMAD, J.---The dispute in this writ arises out of a pending suit for recovery of dowry articles valuing Rs,3,50,000 under the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 filed, by respondent No, l/Azra Bibi against the petitioner/defendant in which his defence was struck off on 9-7-2Q10 and the case was adjourned for evidence of the respondent No, 1/plaintiff. This order was challenged by the petitioner/defendant by filing a revision which was dismissed by the Additional District Judge on 20-9-2010 on the ground that no appeal or revision is competent against the interim order.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that under section 14(3) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, no appeal or revision is maintainable against the interlocutory order. This being so, only a writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan is competent.
3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is without any force. Admittedly under section 14(3) of the Family Court Act, no appeal or revision is competent against the interlocutory order passed by the Family Judge. Likewise an interim order of the Family Court also cannot be legally challenged before the High Court through the writ petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. If any authority is needed, reference may be made to S. Azharul Hassan Naqvi v. Mst. Hamida Bibi and 2 others (1979 CLC 754) and Muhammad Akram v.
Mst. Raheela Aslam and 2 others (PLD 1999 Lahore 33).
4. Be that as it may, the petitioner is not without any remedy in as much as, if a decree is ultimately passed against the decision or the decree wherein he may challenge the interim order, if he so desires.
' In view of above, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is not maintainable and the same is dismissed in limine.'
Cited by 6 cases
- Mashab Ali vs Learned Judge Family Court (East), Islamabad etc 2025 IHC 90, 2025 CLC 987
- MASHAB ALI Versus JUDGE FAMILY COURT (EAST), ISLAMABAD 2025 CLC 987
- MOHAMMAD SHAHZAIB vs MISHAL FATIMA and others 2018 MLD 1131
- MUHAMMAD SHAMAS-UL-HAQ vs Mst. FAUZIA PARVIN and others 2018 MLD 496
- SHAHIDA FAZIL vs Mst. HINA TAHIR and 2 others 2017 YLR 622
- AMANULLAH KHAN vs DISTRICT JUDGE and 3 others 2012 CLC 679