Mst. Najma Naz vs Mst — 2025 YLR 2806 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.

Mst. Najma Naz VS Mst. Farzana Kanwal Ss. 64, 115 & O. XXI, R. 54---Specific Relief act (I of 1877), S. 42---Family Courts act (XXXV of 1964), Ss. 5, Sched, 13(3) & 17---Punjab Land Revenue act (XVII of 1967), S. 90---Suit for declaration---Private alienation of property after attachment to be void---Exclusion of daughters from the right of inheritance---Effect---Decree of maintenance by Family Court, execution of---attachment of immovable property---Judgment-debtor/father of petitioners/ decree-holders alienated his immoveable property through gift mutations in favour of his second wife and son (step-mother and step-brother of petitioners) in order to prevent the execution of decree of maintenance---Petitioners after the death of their father instituted suit for declaration, which was decreed, however, upon appeal preferred by the respondents the decree was set aside---Validity---Disputed gift transactions subsequent to passing of order of attachment was ipso facto void and was an attempt by the judgment-debtor to deprive his minor daughters not only from decreed maintenance amount(s) by frustrating the process of law but also from their right to inherit---Under S. 17 of the Family Courts act, 1964, the provisions of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 and C.P.C. shall not apply to the proceedings before a Family Court except Ss. 10 & 11 C.P.C., and S. 13(3) of the Family Courts act, 1964, empowers the Family Court to execute its own decree---Even S. 64, C.P.C, prohibited a private transfer or delivery of the attached property by the judgment-debtor after attachment has been made and all such transactions are void---Disputed gifts would deprive all the daughters from inheritance and the courts were not divested of the powers to scrutinize the reasons and justification of such like gifts so that no injustice could be done---appellate Court while accepting the appeal failed to properly appreciate such legal proposition as well as the pleadings and oral/documentary evidence of contesting parties and fell in error while dismissing the suit---Judgment and decree of the appellate Court was set-aside and the judgment and decree of the trial Court was upheld---Civil revision was accepted, in circumstances.

Mst. Najma Naz vs Mst — 2025 YLR 2806 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2025 YLR