MUJAHID KAMRAN vs Mst — 2022 CLC 24 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

MUJAHID KAMRAN VS Mst. SAIRA AZIZ Ss.5 & 9---Nikahnama, contents of---Suit for recovery of maintenance/dower amount---Column No. 20 of Nikahnama---Entry of Rs.25,000/- as monthly maintenance allowance---Allegation of cruelty by husband---Petitioner/defendant claimed for restitution of conjugal rights and also filed a suit for cancellation of conditions/entries of Columns Nos. 14, 16, 17, 19 and 20 of Nikahnama on the ground that the same were illegal and incorporated without his consent in deceitful manner---Family Court partially decreed the respondent's suit to the extent of entitlement of the recovery of maintenance at rate of Rs.25,000/- per month with 10% annual increase from date of marriage till the date of judgment---Petitioner's suit was dismissed---Appeals filed by both parties were also dismissed---Validity---Wife could be justified in living separately if the husband treated her with cruelty or did not pay prompt dower---No disagreement or point of cruelty was quoted/proved by respondent other than the demand of dower---No particular point cited/proved by petitioner as to alleged disobedience except the allegation that respondent remained only one day in his house---Petitioner did not prove his version that columns of Nikahnama were afterwards filled in and were the result of forgery---All witnesses of Nikahnama admitted their signatures over the same---Petitioner had not proved that the copy of Nikahnama was not given to him at that time---Petitioner was bound to pay maintenance allowance according to column No.20---Case of respondent was based on column No.20, which could not be dealt with under the conditions of S.17A of the Family Courts Act, 1964---Neither the Court had to see the financial status of husband nor to fix the maintenance on the conditions mentioned in S.17A---Order as to 10% annual increase was not according to the spirit of Column No. 20 of Nikahnama---Date and Majlis of Nikah and signatures on Nikahnama by respective person were admitted---Execution of Nikahnama was proved by the respondent---Nikahkhwan, appearing as witness, had certified that all the columns were filled at that time with consent of parties---Presumption would be that the Nikah Pert (paper) was handed over to the petitioner on that very day which was requirement of law after the registration of the same in Union Council---Petitioner did not prove that the entries in the columns were not in his knowledge---Entries of column No. 19 limiting the absolute right of Talaq of the petitioner were against the spirit of the instructions of Almighty Allah, hence, declared void ab initio and not binding to the parties---High Court declared entries of Column No.19 as null and void---Constitutional petition was partly allowed.

MUJAHID KAMRAN vs Mst — 2022 CLC 24 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 CLC