Dawood Ahmad vs Additional District Judge, Lahore S — 2024 YLR 2680 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Citation: 2024 YLR 2680 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Court: Lahore High Court
Year: 2024
Reporter: YLR
Parties: Dawood Ahmad vs Additional District Judge, Lahore S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 5; S. 7---H; S. 7; S. 105; Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961); Muslim Family Laws Ordinance

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

Judgment text as reported

Dawood Ahmad VS Additional District Judge, Lahore S. 5 & Sched.---Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961), S.7---Husband's right to divorce unconditional---Wife instituted a suit for recovery of gold as per the alleged condition imposed for pronouncement of divorce in Nikahnama---Husband filed objection in the suit and also an application under O.VII R.11, C.P.C., for rejection of plaint contending that the plaint was being barred by law as no clog could be imposed upon the right of a husband to pronounce divorce---Validity---Under S.7 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, a husband is authorized or is at liberty to pronounce Talaq to his wife and it is nowhere mentioned therein that such power/right of a husband regarding pronouncing of Talaq to his wife can be stipulated with the condition to pay a specific penalty or amount in shape of gold---Petitioner had an uncovenanted right to pronounce divorce if he so desired and placing of clog in the said right was against the principles of Islamic Law---Holy Quran and Sunnah as well as provisions of S.105 of the Code of Musim Personal Law written by Dr. Tanzeel-ur-Rehmar and S.7 of the Ordinance empowers a husband with an absolute right to divorce his wife and in this regard no condition is described in at Sharia as well as in the codified law---Duty of Court is firstly to decide the maintainability of the suit as per law and if suit is not maintainable then the proceedings of suit shall be set at rest infinitum as such like cases should be burried at the inception to save the precious time of the Courts and public---Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly and concurrent finding of lower courts were reversed while accepting application of the petitioner for rejection of plaint.

Other judgments reported in 2024 YLR

2024 YLR 2656 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMuhammad Maqsood VS State Ss. 324, 353 & 34---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 23(1)(a)---attempt t…
2024 YLR 2635 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHAbdul Karim VS State S. 497---Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (VII of 1947),Ss. 4, 5, 8 & 23---Payments through informal banking channel of…
2024 YLR 2619 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHBijar alias Bijli VS State Ss. 324, 353, 225, 337-a(i), 337-F(i), 337-H(2), 147, 148 & 149---Sindh arms act (V of 2013), S. 24---anti-Terror…
2024 YLR 2586 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHFayaz alias Fayaz Hussain VS State Ss. 302(b), 324, 353, 337-F(iii), 337-F(v), 337-H(2), 506(2), 148 & 149---anti-Terrorism act (XXVII of 19…
2024 YLR 2561 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHMuhammad Bilal VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A & 109---Prevention of Corruption Act (II…
2024 YLR 1497 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHKHALID VS State Minor contradictions in evidence---In consequential---Every contradiction can not take place of a material contradiction and…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English