ARSALAN ARIF vs SALMA GUL S — 2025 PLD 54 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

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

ARSALAN ARIF VS SALMA GUL S. 5, Sched. & S.7(2), proviso---Family Courts Rules, 1965, R.6---Suit for recovery of dower, maintenance allowance, dowry articles, and gold ornaments was instituted by wife/respondent after being divorced by the husband/petitioner---During pendency of suit both the parties file miscellaneous applications---Application for summoning Nikah Khawan filed by the respondent was accepted, whereas applications filed by the petitioner for return of pictures, correction in the examination-in-chief of PW.1 and cross-examination of PW.2 and return of plaint for want of jurisdiction were dismissed---Validity---Marriage was solemnized at Abbotabad and after its dissolution respondent was living with her parents at Abbotabad---Rule 6 of the Family Courts Rules, 1965, is limited to suits for dissolution of marriage or dower and enables the estranged wife to bring a family suit in a court within the local limits of which she ordinarily resides, thus, the finding of the family court as to territorial jurisdiction was not erroneous or without lawful authority---No prohibition exists in the Family Courts Act, 1964 for calling or production of witnesses even if his name is not mentioned in the list of witnesses---Respondent had not committed a legal error by calling Nikah Khawan as a witness for examination in the Family Court whose name was already available in the list of witnesses, thus, contention of the petitioner was based on misconception---Statements of PW.1 in examination-in-chief and PW.2 in cross-examination were recorded in open court in presence of parties and their counsel, however, the application for correction therein was filed by the petitioner after signing the statements by the Presiding Officer, thus, the correction was rightly disallowed---Pictures had become part and parcel of judicial record, thus, application for return of the same was rightly declined---Application of the petitioner qua medical examination of the respondent was also held to be unwarranted for the reason that after Rukhsati, the respondent remained with the petitioner for sufficient time and performed her marital obligations and the matrimonial ties between the parties had already been broken after consummation---Constitutional petitions were dismissed, in circumstances.

ARSALAN ARIF vs SALMA GUL S — 2025 PLD 54 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 PLD