Suit for Dissolution of Marriage in Pakistan:
Suit for dissolution of marriage
in Pakistan on the basis of Khula, recovery of dowry articles, maintenance,
gold ornaments and dower amounting to Rs.50, 000 was filed by wife in court.
Petitioner instead of filing appeal against the impugned judgment and decree
passed by Judge Family Court before Appellate Court had directly challenged the
same in Constitutional petition before High Court. Petitioner had remedy under
the law to file appeal against the impugned judgment and decree passed by Judge
Family Court before District Judge in case of dissolution
of marriage in Pakistan but instead of availing his remedy, before the
proper forum, he had directly challenged the same before High Court through
Constitutional petition. Petitioner had not asserted to the legal course. High
Court dismissed Constitutional petition being not maintainable. There is bar on appeal against interim order
in case of dissolution of marriage in Pakistan. Section 14(3) of the West
Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 barred appeal against an interim order passed
by a Family Court. Bar on appeal from
decree of Family Court.
About Rate of Maintenance:
Appellate Court enhanced rate of
maintenance upon trial Court decreed the suit by appeal filed by plaintiff.
Defendant contended that judgment of the Appellate Court was result of wrongful
exercise of jurisdiction as S. 14(2) (c) of the West Pakistan Family Courts
Act, 1964 barred appeal from a decree passed by a Family Court awarding maintenance
of Rs.1000 or less per month. Barring clause of S. 14 of the West Pakistan
Family Courts Act, 1964 operated where decree of maintenance was challenged to
disentitle the decree-holder or reduce the rate of maintenance the allowance
and the same was not applicable to appeals for enhancement of maintenance.
Father was Legally Bound to maintain his Children:
Defendant's objection to
maintainability of appeal was, therefore, misconceived. Strong financial
position of defendant had been proved by his gifts to his second wife. Even
otherwise, father was legally bound to maintain his children. Appellate Court
rightly enhanced the rate of maintenance. Constitutional petition was dismissed
accordingly. 7. No appeal or revision
was competent against interlocutory order. No appeal or revision was competent against
interlocutory order of Family Court under S. 14(3) of West Pakistan Family
Courts Act, 1964 in dissolution of marriage in Pakistan. A decree was passed
for dissolution of marriage the husband's suit for restitution of conjugal
rights was dismissed simultaneously.
More about Dissolution of Marriage:
No appeal being competent from
decree of dissolution of marriage in Pakistan. This decree becomes conclusive.
It was held that District Judge was justified in refusing to proceed with
husband's appeal against dismissal of his suit for restitution of conjugal
rights. Dissolution of marriage. Appeal filed by wife. Dismissed earlier in
default as neither appellant wife nor her counsel appeared on date of hearing
of appeal was valid. Appeal filed by wife against judgment and decree of trial
Court according to which suit for dissolution of marriage filed by wife against
her husband was dismissed earlier in default as neither appellant wife nor her
counsel appeared on date of hearing of appeal. Appeal was re-admitted
subsequently and re-heard upon application of wife subject to payment of cost
and husband agreed to re-admission of appeal and accepted cost. Earlier order
dismissing appeal having been passed in absence of wife, re-hearing of appeal
of wife, would not amount to review of earlier decision. Husband, who himself
had agreed to re-hearing and having received cost, was stopped from
re-agitating the matter of re-admission and re-hearing of appeal.
Comments
Post a Comment