MST. ULFAT BIBI THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF

DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.‑‑ ‑This appeal by leave of the Court is directed against the judgment, dated 17‑3‑1997, of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan, passed in Civil Revision No.260‑D of 1974.

2. The facts, in brief, are that appellant Mst. Ulfat Bibi instituted a suit before the Administrative Civil Judge, Multan, for a declaration that Talaqnama dated 17‑4‑1969 already pronounced by her husband Abdul Maleek was fictitious and forged and the decision of the Union Council No.247 dated 20‑5‑1969 and order of the Controlling Authority dated 18‑8‑1969, whereby her revision petition was rejected were illegal and that, as a widow, she was entitled to succeed to her husband's estate after his death. The suit was contested by the respondents on the grounds that Abdul Maleek had divorced Mst. Ulfat Bibi during his lifetime and the divorce deed dated 17‑4‑1969, the order of the Arbitration Council dated 20‑5‑1969 and the decision of the Controlling Authority dated 18‑8‑1969 were legal and not the outcome of fraud/misrepresentation..

3. The trial Court after considering the evidence produced by the parties dismissed the suit on merits through judgment and decree dated 10‑7‑1971. The appeal filed by Mst. Ulfat Bibi against the said judgment and decree was also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge vide judgment dated 13‑3‑1974, which was challenged in Civil Revision No.260‑D of 1974 before the Lahore High Court, which too has been dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 17‑3‑1997.

4. On 10‑4‑1998 leave to appeal was granted to consider whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned Judge in Chambers was justified in not considering the case of the appellants on merits.

5. Learned counsel for the appellants, inter alia, contended that assuming that divorce had been pronounced, the same would be deemed to be ineffective for the reason that proceedings with regard to the same were not taken by the Union Council concerned where Mst. Ulfat Bibi was residing at the relevant time and that the findings of the learned lower Courts and the learned High Court on Issue No.3 are illegal because the same are not based on any evidence.

6. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents submitted that there are concurrent findings of facts, which are based on proper appreciation of evidence by the Courts below, wherein it has been rightly held that Mst. Ulfat Bibi was divorced by Abdul Maleek (deceased).

7. We have considered the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. Late Abdul Maleek issued notice of Talaq to Mst. Ultaf Bibi and the Chairman of Union Council concerned initiated the proceedings according to law. After due deliberation, the Chairman issued the said certificate, which was produced during trial of the suit as Exh.D.3, which is at page 51 of the paper book and reads as under:‑‑

Mst. Ulfat Bibi, appellant also admitted in evidence in the following terms:

8. The crucial point for decision of the suit was divorce, which had been proved through reliable evidence and was accepted by the Courts below. Except the validity of divorce no other point was agitated before the High Court, which has dilated upon in the impugned judgment in the following terms:‑‑

"No other point was raised in support of this revision petition. It is dismissed with no order as to costs."

In view of the evidence discussed above, we are of the firm view that the contentions of 'the learned counsel for the appellants are not tenable.

9. For the facts, circumstances and reasons mentioned hereinabove, we are of. the considered opinion that the appeal is without any merit and substance, which must fail, and the same is hereby dismissed along with the listed application with no order as to costs.

Q.M.H./M.A.K./U'‑10/S Appeal dismissed.