Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

1988 C L C 1213

1988 C L C 1213

[Lahore]

Before Afrasiab Khan, J FALAK SHER‑‑Petitioner

versus

RAJAN BIBI and others‑‑Respondents

Writ Petition No.1164 of 1988, heard on 30th March, 1988.

Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961)‑‑

‑‑‑5. 9‑‑Suit for maintenance‑‑Maintenance allowance , to wife, against husband was granted ex parte by Chairman Arbitration Council‑ Petitioner filed revision against such decision alleging that his presence before Chairman Arbitration Council was fictitious one was dismissed‑ Petitioner filing constitutional petition against dismissal order of revisional Court alleging that matter of his presence before Chairman being material one, had not been ,gone into by Court below‑‑High Court, in view of agreement arrived at between parties to the effect that direction be given to revisional Court below to dispose of matter at a particular time on merits after hearing parties, set aside order passed by revisional Court, and directed that matter be disposed of on merits after hearing the parties.

Shahid Hussain Kadri for Petitioner. Ch. Abdul Majid Gondal .for Respondents. Date of hearing: 30th March, 1988.

JUDGMENT

Petitioner Falak Sher has moved this constitutional petition praying therein that the orders passed by respondents Nos. 2 and 3 in favour of respondent No. 1 may be declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal consequence.

2. The case in brief is that respondent No. 1 being the wife of the petitioner Falak Sher moved an application for the grant of maintenance allowance, which was allowed ex parte. The petitioner went in revision, which was heard and dismissed by the learned Deputy Commissioner/ Collector, Gujranwala, on 2‑2‑1988. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended forcefully that the presence of the petitioner before the Chairman, Arbitration Council, was fictitious as the petitioner used to place thumb mark whereas signature of the petitioner has been shown to exist on the record. Learned counsel urged that this was a very material question, which has not been gone into by the revisional Court. Learned counsel for the respondent was unable to say much about this. The agreement between the learned counsel for the parties is that a direction be given to the learned revisional Court to dispose of the matter at a particular date, and A that the revision be disposed of on merits after hearing the parties.

In view of the agreement arrived at between them the order, dated 2‑2‑1988 passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner/ Collector, Gujranwala, is set aside and that the revision filed by the respondent shall be deemed pending before the revisional Court. The parties shall appear before the Deputy Commissioner/ Collector, Gujranwala, on 6‑4‑1988 and on, that date the learned Collector after hearing the parties concerned shall finally dispose of the matter on merits. With this observation this petition succeeds and is allowed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

H.B.T./F‑7211. Case remanded.

Related Legal Research & Directories

• Browse all judgments from Lahore High Court
• Search Pakistani statutes: Constitution of Pakistan 1973, PPC, CrPC, CPC & Family Laws
• Analyze this case with Al Wakeelo AI Legal Assistant