MUHAMMAD YOUSAF vs HUMA SAEED S — 2024 SCMR 1078 SUPREME-COURT

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

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF VS HUMA SAEED S. 5 & Sched.---Dower (mehr), recovery of---Entry in column No.17 of the Nikahnama---Interpretation---Free consent and freedom of the bride to settle the terms of her Nikah Nama---Significance---Entitlement of divorced wife to immoveable property described in column 17 of the Nikah Nama---Form of Nikah Nama nor its headings are conclusive or sacrosanct---It is the intent of the parties which would be the determining factor---In the present case the description of the plot in column 17 of the Nikah Nama is explicit and not disputed---However, there is no condition stipulated in the column except the description of the plot---Petitioner (husband) had filed his written statement in response to the plaint and had expressly admitted the description of the property but he had taken the stance that the plot was meant for the construction of a house and the respondent (wife) was to live in it for as long as the marriage subsisted---However, a plain reading of the description of the property, as mentioned in column 17, does not indicate nor supports such a stance---If such an interpretation is accepted then the property would not form part of the dower separately mentioned in columns 13 to 16 of the Nikah Nama---Copy of the Nikah Nama showed that no condition has been stipulated in column 17 except describing the property---It is not the case of the petitioner (husband) that the columns were filled by the respondent (wife) or pursuant to meaningful consultation carried out with her before or at the time of execution of the Nikah Nama---No such evidence was brought on record---Onus was on the petitioner (husband) to establish that the property described in column No. 17 was not meant nor intended by the parties to be part of the dower---Ambiguity, if any, cannot be construed against the interests and rights of the respondent (wife) in the facts and circumstances of the present case---Moreover, accepting the stance of the petitioner (husband) would amount to reading in the Nikah Nama something not provided therein----Courts cannot construe the Nikah Nama and its entries as having the effect of applying a stipulation not expressly provided therein---High Court had correctly interpreted the columns of the Nikah Nama and declared the respondent (wife) entitled to the plot described in column 17 of the Nikah Nama---Petition was dismissed and leave was refused.

MUHAMMAD YOUSAF vs HUMA SAEED S — 2024 SCMR 1078 SUPREME-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 SCMR