Chairman Union Council

Citation Name : 2006 YLR 2515 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE
Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD ALI

Side Opponent : AHMAD YAR
---S.7(1)---West Pakistan Rules under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961,
R.3(b)---Talaq, notice of ---Proof ---Acknowledgement due-receipt showing
dispatch of talaqnama by husband to chairman, union council through
registered cover with acknowledgement due bearing signatures of chairman
---Talaq was proved.
Citation Name : 2006 CLC 1544 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Side Appellant : Syed MUSA RAZA RIZVI through Special Attorney
Side Opponent : Mst. SYEDA FARKHANDA JABEEN RIZVI
--S. 7---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---
Divorce---Conciliation proceedings---Not issuing of certificate of effectiveness of
divorce----Marriage tie between the parties having ended in divorce, petitioner,
who was abroad sent first divorce notice to the wife, duly attested by Consular,
Embassy of Pakistan copy of which was sent to chairman union council
---Second and third notice were also sent and petitioner also appointed his
attorney as his representative in conciliation proceedings---Conciliation
proceedings were conducted, but on their failure, certificate of effectiveness of
divorce, was not issued by chairman union council on the ground that divorce
deed received by him was doubtful and had not been sent through the
Embassy---Original divorce deed placed on record had been attested by
Consular, Embassy of Pakistan---Special Power of Attorney in favour of attorney
of petitioner was also attested by Consular, Embassy of Pakistan---Said
documents had negated stand of chairman union council and he had committed
illegality floating on the surface of record in holding that document of Divorce
and Power of Attorney were not attested by the Embassy---Constitutional
petition was .allowed and order passed by chairman union council was set
aside, with the result that proceedings of conciliation would 'be deemed to be
pending before the chairman , who would decide same afresh within specified
time.

Side Appellant : GHULAM RASOOL
Side Opponent : ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHIWAL
---Ss.8 & 9(6)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional
petition--Ex parse decree, setting aside of ---Limitation---Service of process---
Press publication in newspaper having limited circulation---Wife filed appeal
against judgment and decree passed by Family Court---In compliance of the
provisions of S.8 of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, Appellate Court got
proclamation published in newspaper having very limited circulation which was
not read in the village of husband---Appellate Court on the basis of such press
publication decided the appeal ex parte on 18-2-2000, and decree was passed in
favour of wife---Husband came to know about the decree on 23-2-2001, who filed
application to set aside ex parte decree on 13-3-2001---Appellate Court dismissed
the application being barred by limitation---Validity---Service in family matters
was very necessary---Husband was neither served at Family Court nor at
Appellate Court---Proclamation was published for the service of husband in such
newspaper which was neither widely published nor reached or read in the
village of husband---No summons for the service of husband was sent to the
chairman of union council where he resided---Appellate Court before
proceeding ex parte against the husband had not complied with the mandatory
requirements of the law as provided in S.8 of West Pakistan Family Courts Act,
1964---

Side Appellant : MEHNAZ MEHBOOB
Side Opponent : ISHTIAQ UR RASHID
---Ss. 7 & 8---Authority of chairman Arbitration council ---chairman Arbitration
council had no authority to adjudicate upon validity or otherwise of 'Talaq'
pronounced by husband or his delegatee (wife)---Arbitration council was
constituted only for purpose of bringing about reconciliation between parties
and in event of its failure, 'Talaq', ipso facto, would become effective on expiry of
90 days of receipt of notice under S.7 of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961---
Husband, in case of delegating right of Talaq (Tafweez) to wife at the time of
marriage, which fact if duly incorporated in 'Nikahnama', and wife in exercise of
her said right issued notice to chairman union council ---chairman was duty
bound to constitute Arbitration council and proceed in accordance with
provisions and he had no right to declare right of divorce through Tafweez as
un-Islamic, unlawful and against Injunctions of Qur'an and Sunnah---Since wife
in case, had issued notice to chairman union council , who constituted
Arbitration council , but compromise could not be effected between parties, no
option was left with Arbitration council, but to declare that Arbitration
proceedings had failed.

Side Appellant : HAIBAT NAWAZ KHAN
Side Opponent : Mst. NAJMA BIBI alias NAJMA PARVEEN
---Ss. 5, Sched & 9--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional
petition---Suit for recovery of maintenance amount---Documentary evidence,
production of --Evidence was led by respondents, whereafter petitioner
produced his oral evidence and case was adjourned for production of
documentary evidence---Petitioner, on the adjourned date of hearing, attempted
to produce certified copy of a certificate allegedly issued by chairman , union
council concerned and attempted to prove that he had divorced the
respondent---Family Court, on the objection of respondent, vide impugned order
declined permission to petitioner to produce said document--Petitioner had
contended that the document sought to be produced was certified copy of a
public document and Family Court was vested with jurisdiction and discretion
to permit him to produce said document---Specific issue was framed by Family
Court as to whether petitioner had divorced the respondent---Evidence of
petitioner had not been closed and case was fixed for production of documentary
evidence---Document sought to be produced by petitioner being relevant,
impugned order of Family Court, was set aside in the interest of justice and
petitioner was permitted to present said document in the Court subject to
payment of costs---Family Court, however, would examine admissibility and
legal effect of said document.

Side Appellant : WAJID ALI KHAN
Side Opponent : DISTRICT OFFICER (REVENUE), D.C.O. OFFICE, LAHORE
---S. 9---West Pakistan Rules under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961,
R.6-A---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---
Recovery of maintenance allowance--Transfer of proceedings under S.9 of
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, from one union council to other union
council ---Grievance of husband was that only that union council was
competent to grant maintenance, in which wife was residing and such matter
could not be transferred to any other union council ---Validity---District of ficer
Revenue, under R.6-A of Rules under Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961,
could only change chairman of arbitration council nominating some other
member of the same union council to be chairman of arbitration council for that
particular case---District of ficer Revenue had no jurisdiction to transfer
application under S.9 of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, from one union
council to other union council ---Decision given by union council other than the
one where wife was residing, was without lawful authority having no
jurisdiction and the transfer order passed by District of ficer Revenue was also
nullity in the eye of law---High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction,
set aside both the orders and remanded the matter to the union council where
wife was residing---Petition was allowed accordingly.
Citation Name : 2006 MLD 89 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Side Appellant : SHAHID THAHEEM
Side Opponent : ELECTION AUTHORITY SINDH, through Chairman, Karachi
---S. 24---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199 --- Constitutional petition---
Internal recall motion ---Petitioner was Zila Nazim against whom internal recall
motion was moved---Session was duly attended by 76 out of 83 members of Zila
council and proceedings were presided over by the of ficer nominated by
chairman Election Authority---Contents of the motion were read with the
permission of the Presiding of ficer, in presence of petitioner, who in rebuttal
addressed the house at length, whereafter the Presiding of ficer invited members
to express their views---Members of the house requested Presiding of ficer to put
the motion to vote, whereupon members were allowed to cast their votes
through secret ballots---Before voting commenced, empty ballot box was shown
to members and to representatives of press and media---Out of 68 members who
attended the motion, 64 voted in favour of the motion and only 3 members voted
against the motion, whereas one ballot paper was found blank---Internal recall
motion against petitioner was approved---Validity---No irregularity or illegality
was found in the proceedings of session in question---Entire proceedings
pertaining to internal recall motion against Zila Nazim commencing with the
conception of motion and culminating into its approval by Zila council in its
session were lawful and were in conformity with the provisions of Sindh Local
Government Ordinance, 2001---High Court directed Election Authority to cause
a vote to be cast by members of union council s in that District as required by
S.24(4) of Sindh Local Government Ordinance, 20p1, without any further delay---
Petition was disposed of accordingly.
Citation Name : 2005 PLD 644 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Side Appellant : Maj. ZAHID HUSSAIN
Side Opponent : CHAIRMAN, ARBITRATION COUNCIL, CANTONMENT
BOARD, LAHORE
---S. 7---West Pakistan Rules Under The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961,
R.3(b)---Constitution of Pakistan. (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---
Notice of Talaq---Issuance of notice---Transfer of proceedings---Petitioner
husband while posted at place where respondent wife also lived with him,
issued notice of Talaq under S.7 of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 to
chairman Arbitration council at place "L", copy of which was remitted to
respondent, who at relevant time was residing in that area---On application of
respondent, chairman Arbitration council transferred proceedings to Nazim
union council it place `S' where respondent alleged that she was residing there,
without calling upon petitioner to explain. as to why matter/proceedings be not
transferred to place "S" as prayed for by the respondent---Rule 3(b) of West
Pakistan Rules Under The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 had clearly
envisaged that chairman concerned would mean chairman of union council of
union or Town in which wife at the time of pronouncement of Talaq was
residing and not the chairman to whose jurisdiction she subsequently shifted her
abode---According to claim of petitioner, respondent was residing within area
"L" when he pronounced Talaq---Petitioner, in circumstances, had correctly
remitted notice to chairman Arbitration council at place "L" who, without
determining that aspect of matter, remitted file to place "S" on simple request of
respondent---No provision existed of transfer of notice of divorce by chairman
union /Town council either in Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 or in Rules
framed thereunder---In absence of any such provision, transfer of
matter/proceedings regarding divorce by chairman Arbitration council , was
without jurisdiction---Order of transfer of proceedings, was declared to be
illegal, void and of no legal effect with the result that notice of divorce by
petitioner would be deemed to be pending before chairman Arbitration council
at place "L" who would decide matter again, accordingly.

Side Appellant : GHULAM ABBAS
Side Opponent : PROVINCE OF PUNJAB through District Collector, Jhang
---Ss. 5 & 7---Conciliation Committee---Scope---Conciliation Committee of union
council , acting as Conciliation Court---Validity---No provision existed in
Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961, equipping members of a union council to
act as Conciliation Committee and to discharge functions of Conciliation Court
or to penalize any of the parties before them, with any kind of penalty---
Conciliation Committee of union council does not figure any where in
Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961---Conciliation Committee in terms of S.5 of
Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961 is a body consisting of a chairman and two
representatives to be nominated in the prescribed manner, one by each of the
parties to the dispute---Committee of union council cannot act as Reconciliation
Court under S.5(1) or Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961, and cannot assume
jurisdiction in terms or S.7(3) of Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961.
Citation Name : 2005 PLD 358 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Side Appellant : BATOOL TAHIR through Nominee/Representative/ Special
Attorney Mustejab Zebra
Side Opponent : PROVINCE OF SINDH through Secretary Local Government
Sindh
-S. 7---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition
---Talaq---Validity---council lors had no authority in law to give a finding on
validity or otherwise of Talaq and they had travelled beyond their jurisdiction by
declaring the Talaq pronounced b5 the husband ineffective---Section 7 of the
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 required the husband to give a notice to
the chairman in terms of S.7(1) and upon expiry of 90 days from the date of
delivery of the notice to the chairman , Talaq would become effective subject to
the conditions contained in S.7(5) of the Ordinance---Non-constitution of
Arbitration council and non-issuance of notice to the wife would not invalidate
Talaq pronounced by her husband as the provisions of S.7 of the Ordinance were
directory in nature and did not entail any penalty for its non-compliance
---Nazim union council could only record the contentions of both the parties
before him and then could merely state whether reconciliation efforts between
them had succeeded or not--Validity or otherwise of Talaq could .only be
examined by a Court of competent jurisdiction under, the Family Laws---Wife,
therefore, could not claim that non-issuance of notice under S.7(1) of the Muslim
Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 to her either by the Nazim union council or non-
supply of the copy of the Talaqnama by her husband, would make Talaq
ineffective or would invalidate the same, for the reason that the wife knew that
Talaq had been pronounced by the husband besides the fact that Talaq would
become effective on expiry of 90 days from the date of its pronouncement
irrespective of the service of notice on the chairman union council or on the
wife, and non-service of notice on them would not make Talaq ineffective---
Constitutional petition was disposed of accordingly.
Citation Name : 2004 YLR 1979 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Side Appellant : SHAMS-UR-REHMAN
Side Opponent : N.-W.F.P. through Secretary, Local Government Department
and 2 others
----Ss. 85 & 92---Removal of elected member---Procedure---System of election of
the members of Local council , their Nazim and Naib Nazim and their removal
from of fice introduced under the provisions of North-West Frontier Province
Local Government Ordinance, 2001, is different than that laid down in North-
West Frontier Province Local Government Ordinance, 1979, which stood
repealed---chairman or Vice-chairman , under the repealed Ordinance were
elected by the members of the council and removed simply by vote of no
confidence by the members ---Nazim and Naib Nazim of a council under North-
West Frontier Province Local Government Ordinance, 2001, though are elected
through adult franchise, but they are liable to be removed by the members of the
council and subject to affirmation by the members of the Village council and
Neighbourhood council in the case of union Nazim and that too by internal
recall and not by vote of no confidence.

Side Appellant : UM-A-TAMEEM alias SAMINA BIBI anal another
Side Opponent : STATION HOUSE OFFICER, POLICE STATION,
TANDLIANWALA and 2 others
----Ss. 10/16 ---Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961), S.7—Constitution
of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--Constitutional petition---Quashing of F.I.R.---
Accused lady after having been divorced by the complainant had contracted a
valid, legitimate and perfectly legal marriage with her co-accused---Non
compliance of requirement of S.7 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961,
regarding sending the notice of "Talaq" to the chairman , union council , had not
rendered the "Talaq" ineffective--Continuation of the proceedings in the
impugned F.I.R., thus, would not serve any useful purpose and would clearly
amount to an abuse of the process of law--F.I.R. was consequently quashed and
the petition was accepted accordingly.
Citation Name : 2004 YLR 619 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-Court

Side Appellant : SHOUKAT ALI
Side Opponent : THE STATE
----S. 7---Talaq---Ingredients of Talaq--Failure to follow prescribed procedure--
Effect---Provisions of S.7 of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 had stipulated
three steps to pronounce Talaq; firstly it had to be verbally pronounced; as
mandated by Shariat; secondly the same be pronounced in any form whatsoever,
which would mean that in any prevalent mode i.e. one's own language or in
Arabic as some sects prescribed in that behalf; thirdly, verbal pronouncement of
Talaq had to be reduced into writing and had to be conveyed to the chairman of
union council with a copy to the wife---Failure to strictly comply with said
procedure would not, invalidate Talaq---Necessary requirement or ingredients of
Talaq was a conscious and wilful pronouncement of Talaq with intention to
release wife from marriage bond---Failure to follow said procedure could entail
or be followed by punishment prescribed under succeeding subsection (2) of S.7
of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, but validity of Talaq or separation of
spouses from the marriage bond would not be affected.
Citation Name : 2003 PLD 169 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Side Appellant : FAZLI-E-SUBHAN
Side Opponent : Mst. SABEREEN
----Ss. 7 & 8---Talaq---Effect of enactment of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance,
1961---Legislature had, to a great extent, trammelled and curtailed the arbitrary
power of husband to divorce his wife---Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961
had abolished the practice of disapproved form of 'Talaq'and mode prescribed in
the Ordinance was that of a 'Talaq-e-Ahsan'and by the Ordinance it had been
made mandatory that the notice of 'Talaq'should be given in writing to the
chairman of union council ---'Talaq'would be effected only if efforts of
reconciliation would fail---Law prevailing previous to the enforcement of
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, had made it obligatory for the couples
divorced by any mode of 'Talaq'other than'Talaq-e-Ahsan'not to re-marry each
other again, unless wife married another man who died or divorced her after
actual consummation and she married her first husband after period of 'Iddat'---
Before re-marriage parties had to prove that bar to their marriage was removed
by intermediate marriage, consummation and dissolution, otherwise their
marriage was not considered valid---Mode of 'Talaq'effected under provisions of
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 being almost that of 'Talaq-e-Ahsan', the
couples could re-marry without any intervening marriage except where they had
been divorced thrice and the third divorce had become effective and in that case
they could not re-marry without an intervening marriage---Plain reading of S.7
of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 though had implied that all kinds of
'Talaqs'had been made revocable without an intervening marriage and could be
that its repugnancy to such extent could validly be agitated on the touchstone of
Quranic behest and the traditions of Holy Prophet (peace be upon him), but
neither vires of said S.7 had been challenged nor matter raised in case pertained
to all kinds of 'Talaqs'---Matter, in the present case, pertained, to'Talaq'obtained
by wife through Court decree in shape of Khula.

Side Appellant : SHABBIR HUSSAIN
Side Opponent : DEPUTY COMMISSIONER/CONTROLLING AUTHORITY
OF UNION COUNCILS, NAROWAL
----S.9---Limitation Act (1X of 1908), Art. 120---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908),
S.48---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional petition---
Maintenance---Ex parte order by chairman , union council ---Limit of time for
execution of -decree for maintenance---Claim for past maintenance---
Limitation---Challenged in Constitutional petition---Validity---Wife of the
petitioner/ respondent had approached chairman , union council /respondent
with application for maintenance on 9-1-1993-Two notices had been sent to the
petitioner by the chairman , union council which had returned undelivered and
he had observed in the order sheet that neither of the notices had been received
by the petitioner---Petitioner, thereafter was proceeded ex parte and after
recording the evidence of the wife of the petitioner, the chairman , union
council ordered the petitioner to pay Rs. 84, 000 as past maintenance for seven
years to his wife and minor daughter---Wife of the petitioner had filed the
execution petition 6-1 /2 years after the order of the chairman , union council
while the period of limitation was clearly six years---If first application for
execution had been filed within three years, the execution proceedings were
patently time-barred---Petitioner had filed a revision petition when he received
notice of the execution proceedings and the Deputy Commissioner without
taking into consideration contentions of the petitioner that he had been
condemned unheard had proceeded to dismiss his revision petition as being
time-barred and also dismissed the review petition on merits---Order of the
chairman , union council suffered from three legal lacunas; firstly, chairman
union council had not effected service on the petitioner through citation
published in some daily of the area where the petitioner resided as the notices
had returned unserved and as required under the Muslim Family Laws
Ordinance, 1961; secondly the chairman had awarded maintenance for 7 years to
the petitioner while under Art. 120 of the Limitation Act, 1908, maximum period
for which maintenance could be awarded was 6 years and thirdly, application of
the wife of the petitioner for execution of decree of chairman , union council
had been filed after 6-1/2 years, and therefore, it was time-barred---Orders of the
chairman union council and of Deputy Commissioner were declared to be of no
legal effect and were set aside by the High Court.
Citation Name : 2002 MLD 778 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Side Appellant : Mst. AMBREEN SHAH
Side Opponent : CHAIRMAN, UNION (ARBITRATION) COUNCIL/
ADMINISTRATOR, UNION COMMITT
West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 ----S. 5 & Sched.---Muslim Family Laws
Ordinance (VIII of 1961), Ss.7 & 8---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---
Constitutional petition ---Talaq in form of "Mubaraat"---Withdrawal of notice of
Talaq---chairman , union . council declined to issue certificate of Talaq to
petitioner/lady on ground that since her husband/respondent had filed
application for withdrawal of notice of Talaq within period of 90 days of receipt
of notice, divorce had been rendered ineffective---Document of Talaq had clearly
shown that it was not a unilateral pronouncement of Talaq, but it was a Talaq
inform of "Mubaraat" which had been entered into by consent of both parties--
Document of pronouncement was a mutual revocation of contract of marriage
entered into at time of Nikah and since both parties had mutually revoked
contract, one party could not unilaterally revive the contract without consent of
other ---Talaq in form of "Mabaraat" was irrevocable from the date of its
execution and provisions of S.7, Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 would be
inapplicable to such a case---If party to Talaq applied for a certificate from
chairman , regarding effectiveness of Talaq, he would have no option but to
declare Talaq as effective---Application for cancellation or revocation to
chairman and issuance of cancellation certificate was incompetent and was
without lawful authority---Once triple divorce had been pronounced, Talaq
would become irrevocable.

Side Appellant : HUSSAIN BAKHSH KHAN
Side Opponent : DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, D.G. KHAN
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 S. 7---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420,
466, 467 & 468---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional
petition---False and fictitious certificate of Talaq issued by chairman union
council to respondent (wife of deceased) in connivance with brothers of
deceased so as to deprive her of inheritance from her deceased husband---
Deputy Commissioner conducted inquiry through Project Manager and, on
receipt of Inquiry Report, ordered registration of criminal case against chairman
of union council and brothers of deceased for preparing absolutely false and
fictitious record---Validity---Entire record prepared by chairman union council
with connivance of brothers of deceased was absolutely bogus and whole
exercise had been conducted to deprive respondent of her right of inheritance---
Such act amounted to of fence under Penal Code, 1860---False and fictitious
record prepared by chairman union council could be looked into by Inspecting
officer (Project Manager) and delinquent official could not escape his criminal
liability---Very serious consequences would flow from issuance of false and
fictitious certificate of Talaq i.e. marriage between spouses would come to an
end, which was not only of fence but gross violation of Islamic Injunctions---
Sanctity of marriage having been violated, not only wife would be deprived to
receive her share in inheritance but issue in wedlock would be rendered
illegitimate---Such act amounted to dishonour of departed soul of respondent's
husband---chairman union council had, thus, committed extremely heinous
crime under Penal Code as also under Islamic law---Deputy Commissioner as
also Project Manager (Inspecting of ficer) had exercised their authority in aid of
justice and fairplay--No direction in the nature of writ would be issued in aid of
injustice---Order of registration of case being equitable and having promoted
cause of justice, same could not be set aside---Copy of order of High Court was
sent to S.P. of the District concerned for compliance of order passed by Deputy
Commissioner.

Side Appellant : PROVINCE OF THE PUNJAB
Side Opponent : MANZOOR AHMAD WATTOO
Punjab Local Government Ordinance 1979 Ss.12-B & 12(2) [as introduced by
Punjab Local Government Ordinance (I of 1998)]---Constitution of Pakistan
(1973), Art.25---Nomination of members of Panchayat by the Government,
Sarpanch whereof would be ex officio member of union council concerned in
terms of S.12-B, Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979---Provision of S.12(2)
of Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979 provided that member of Zila
council would be ex of ficio chairman of union council concerned---High Court
(Single Bench) had declared provisions of Ss.12-B & 12(2), Punjab Local
Government Ordinance, 1979, to be ultra vires of the Constitution---Validity---
No guidelines or parameters had been provided for Government in making
nomination of Serpanch of Punchayat--Government would, therefore, be free to
pick and choose any person of its choice without any qualifications---Discretion
of Government having not been structured, would be absolute and arbitrary---
Impugned Ordinance I of 1998, whereby amendments in question were effected
was ex facie discriminatory and was capable of being administered in-
discriminatory and arbitrary manner in violation of Art.25 of the Constitution
which guarantees equality before law and equal protection of law.
Citation Name : 1997 PCRLJ 1655 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-Court

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE
of fence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 ---Ss. 10(2) & 16---
Appreciation of evidence---Divorce deed executed on 11-6-1989 and three Talaqs
given by the complainant at a stretch on that day had fully and clearly dissolved
marriage between the complainant and the female accused with effect from the
same day and even if the complainant after having given notice to the chairman ,
union council had withdrawn the same before the expiry of 90 days, that did not
alter the legal position of the marriage having been dissolved on 11-6-1989---
Accused who had validly married each other, therefore, could not be held liable
for having committed Zina, nor male accused was liable for having committed an
of fence of enticing away the female accused---Accused were acquitted
accordingly.
Citation Name : 1995 PCRLJ 1247 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Side Appellant : ABDUL RASHID
Side Opponent : S.H.O., POLICE STATION RENALA (MALLIANWALA)
Muhammadan Law ----Divorce---If spouses decide to separate with mutual
consent' and a document in the shape of Talaq is prepared and is signed by the
husband, Talaq becomes final for all intents and purposes and the husband
thereafter cannot withdraw the Talaq and the chairman union council is bound
to register the same under S.8 of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961.

Side Appellant : PIR BAKHSH ALIAS PEELA
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) ----S. 497(2)---of fence of Zina (Enforcement of
Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.16/10---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.380---
Bail, grant of ---Accused had contracted a valid Nikah with the complainant's
wife after having seen the divorce deed and she had also sworn on affidavit to
the effect of her being the legally-wedded wife of the accused---Non-submission
of notice of Talaaq to chairman , union council could not render the Talaaq
ineffective or void--Matter needed further inquiry---Accused was admitted to
bail in circumstances.

Side Appellant : AMIRA BOKHARI
Side Opponent : JAMEELUDDIN BOKHARI
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 ----Ss.l (2) & 7---Civil Procedure Code (V of
1908), S.20---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Spouses were American
citizens---Pronouncement of Talaq by husband in Pakistan---Certificate of
effectiveness of Talaq issued by chairman union council in Pakistan---Validity---
Provisions of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, are applicable only to
Muslim citizens of Pakistan wherever they may be---Foreign citizens can invoke
jurisdiction of Civil Court in terms of S.20, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, under
which Civil Court enjoys plenary jurisdiction to entertain and try any suit, if
parties at the commencement of suit were residing within its local limits---
Foreign citizens can also approach High Court for redress of their grievance
under Art.199 of the Constitution---Mere fact that husband was citizen of a
foreign country would make no difference in respect of his right to pronounce
Talaq--Contesting parties having not claimed any other faith, would be
presumed to be Hanafi Sunni Muslims ---Talaq pronounced thrice by Muslim
husband would instantaneously become effective and irrevocably dissolved
marital tie--Provisions of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 being applicable
to Muslim citizens of Pakistan, provisions for sending notice to chairman by
husband (a foreign national), constitution of Arbitration council and issuance of
certificate of effectiveness of Talaq were not attracted, for spouses were
American citizens---Proceedings before chairman union council in Pakistan
were thus, futile and nullity in the eye of law--Talaq pronounced thrice by
husband had become effective while certificate of effectiveness of Talaq was of
no legal effect.
Side Opponent : NOOR JAHAN
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 S. 7---Factum of talaq and its
effectiveness---Courts have to decide a dispute in the light of the law of the land
which requires that talaq would become effective only if it was routed through
chairman union council concerned in accordance with the provisions of Muslim
Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, which was a valid statute---Even if photostat copy
of talaqnama in the hands of plaintiff was considered to be a genuine document,
still talaq having not been routed through chairman of the union council , same
had not become effective---Evidence on record, however, in support of talaq
produced by plaintiff was full of contradictions and no effort was made to bring
the original talaqnama, if any, on record ---Talaq was not proved in
circumstances.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD IQBAL
Side Opponent : MUHAMMAD YAR
West Pakistan Consolidation of Holding Ordinance 1960 ----Ss. 10(3) & 13---
Consolidation of holdings---Petitioners had challenged concurrent order of
Authorities concerned according to which their pre-owned and pre-possessed
land in Killa concerned over which they had constructed residential houses and
cattle-sheds, was allocated to respondents in consolidation proceedings---
Petitioners claiming preferential right for allocation of land in dispute in their
names on basis of their ownership and possession had claimed and proved that
land in dispute was part of Khata in which respondents were not at all co-
sharers---Ground or justification entitling respondents for inclusion of land in
dispute in their Wanda on basis of their alleged superior rights in respect thereof
was not at all available from record--Residential construction over land in
dispute by petitioners not only was proved by Revenue Record and spot
inspection of Patwari, but was verified by a number of respectables including
Lumberdar and Vice-chairman of union council ---Consolidation Authorities
and Courts below had to totally overlooked that land in dispute had changed its
character, and it was no longer agricultural in nature---Such land should not
have been subjected to consolidation proceedings and it was liable to be allocated
to the owners in occupation of those structures---Allocation of such land to
respondents, was void and was of fensive to consolidation proceedings---Order
of Courts below was set aside and case was remanded to be decided afresh in
accordance with law after determining preferential right of parties in respect of
land in dispute.

Side Appellant : ALI ASGHAR
Side Opponent : QADEER AHMAD
Punjab Local Government Ordinance 1979 Ss. 179, 161 & 162---Complaint filed
by chairman union council against respondent under Ss. 161 & 162 was
dismissed as not maintainable---Suit for damages against chairman (petitioner)
was decreed by Courts below--chairman claiming protection of law under S. 179,
Punjab Local Government Ordinance, 1979---Effect---Only those acts of an
Authority which had the sanction of law and were performed in bona fide
manner would have legal sanctity and protection---In absence of ingredients of
good faith, such acts would not be immune from judicial scrutiny---Petitioner
having failed to prove his good faith and bona fide in the concerned matter could
not seek protection under S. 179, Punjab Local Government Ordinance 1979.

Side Appellant : RIAZ AHMAD MALIK
Side Opponent : GHAZALA RIAZ MALIK
Constitution of Pakistan 1973 Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Maintainability
of ---Only chairman , union council , who was described as `formerly chairman
', was arrayed as respondent in the Constitutional petition---Respondent not
being a public functionary on day constitutional petition was filed, no writ could
be issued against him, he being a private individual.

Side Appellant : SAIMA RASHID
Side Opponent : IMRAN RIAZ IMAMI
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 Ss. 1(2) & 7---Muslim citizen of Pakistan (a
female) entering into a marriage contract with a Muslim citizen of U.S.A. (a
male) in Pakistan--Marriage was registered in accordance with the provisions of
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961---Husband invoking jurisdiction of
chairman of union council concerned, under S.7 of the Ordinance for initiating
divorce proceedings against his wife---Held, proceedings under S.7, Muslim
Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, could only be invoked by a man who was a
Muslim citizen of Pakistan---Husband being a citizen of U.S.A. was not entitled
to initiate proceedings against his wife under the provision of S.7, Muslim
Family Laws Ordinance, 1961.
Citation Name : 1992 CLC 395 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Side Appellant : KHAN BAHADUR
Side Opponent : DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DISTRICT KOHISTAN
Domicile Educational institution---Domicile certificate originally issued to
petitioner was duly enquired into, after verification of concerned Tehsildar,
based on the evidence of chairman arid members of more than one union
council s---Status of petitioner as also that of his father being. originally domicile
of concerned district could not be disputed---Petitioner's father having shifted
his residence to Gilgit and doing his business there, by itself would not be
sufficient to indicate that he had abandoned his domicile of origin, more
particularly when he was still holding his ancestral property therein. in token of
his adherence thereto---Subsequent enquiry report and cancellation of domicile
certificate being misconceived proceeded on wrong direction---Order of
cancellation of petitioner's domicile was. thus, not sustainable.

Side Appellant : AMJAD ALI MANI
Side Opponent : THE PUNJAB LOCAL COUNCIL ELECTION AUTHORITY
Punjab Local council s (Election) Rules 1979 ----R.58---Election to of fices of
chairman and Vice-chairman of union council ---Objection on ground that one
of the elected members having not taken Oath of of fice, union council
concerned was not constituted--Validity---Names of all successful candidates
including that of the one who had not taken Oath as yet, were duly notified in of
ficial Gazette as members of union council ---Election Authority, after issuance
of Notification of names of members of Local council s including those
belonging to minority communities and special interests, had fixed date calling
upon members of union council concerned, to elect their chairman and Vice-
chairman ---Requirement of R.58, Punjab Local council s (Election) Rules, 1979,
thus stood fully met with issuance of notification of election of all the members
including that one who had not taken Oath of of fice---No impediment for
holding election for of fices of chairman and Vice-chairman was pointed out----
union council stood constituted as soon as names of members of council were
notified, irrespective of the fact whether members had taken Oath or not---
Authority, thus, could not be restrained from holding election to the of fice of
chairman and Vice chairman , as per schedule.

Side Appellant : AMANULLAH
Pakistan Penal Code ----S. 302---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.345 [as
amended under Criminal Law (Amendment) Ordinance (IV of 1990), S.41---
Compromise--Heirs of deceased, who were widow, sons and daughter of
deceased, had stated that they had compromised with accused and had forgiven
him in the name of Allah ---Factum of compromise between parties had also
been supported by chairman of union council concerned who had made
statement in Court in that respect---Compromise arrived at between parties
appeared to be genuine and nothing had come to. the light to hold that it could
be the result of some coercion or misconception---Nothing being on record
calling for action under S.311, P.P.C. as well, compromise entered into between
parties was allowed and accused was acquitted by way of acceptance of
compromise.

Side Appellant : AKBAR HUSSAIN SHAH
Pakistan Penal Code ----Ss. 21 & 409- Prevention of Corruption Act (l1 of 1947),
Ss.2 & 5(2)--Misappropriation---Accused, chairman of union council was
entrusted with Rs.8,000 for repairs of specified items of Government School
building--Accused spend Rs.8,600 on items not specified in estimate but on items
which lie considered more necessary to be replaced---Accused did not
misappropriate any amount and no offence was committed by him---Accused
was acquitted in circumstances.

Side Appellant : AKBAR HUSSAIN SHAH
Pakistan Penal Code ----Ss. 21 & 409---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947),
S.2---Public servant---Jurisdiction of Special Judge---Accused was chairman
union council and as Project Leader was entrusted with some money for repairs
of school building---Every member of union council and every servant of Local
Government having been declared as a public servant under Art.98 of Basic
Democracies Order (18 of 1959) for purposes of S.21, P.P.C. and S.2 of Prevention
of Corruption Act, 1947, chairman of union council , could be prosecuted for
accepting illegal gratification.

Side Appellant : JAVAID AKHTAR BHATTI
Side Opponent : DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 ----S. 9---Constitution of Pakistan (1973),
Art. 199---Maintenance---Constitutional jurisdiction, exercise of ---Petitioner
husband challenged order granting maintenance to respondent wife on grounds
that the record of proceedings had been manipulated and fabricated by
chairman , that petitioner was not granted any reasonable opportunity of
defending the proceedings and that entire proceedings were conducted by
Secretary of union council instead of chairman as required by law---Record
produced in Court, had supported contentions raised by petitioner---Collector,
despite observing that Arbitration council had recorded statements of witnesses
of petitioner before recording evidence of witnesses of respondent wife and that
there was a legal lacuna in the case, instead of setting aside order of Arbitration
council as a whole simply reduced rate of maintenance granted by chairman
Arbitration council to respondent wife---There being no proper trial of
application of maintenance filed by wife and Collector having failed to adopt the
only course of action which was available to him under law, High Court in
exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction set aside said illegal orders and remanded
case to be decided afresh in accordance with law.
Citation Name : 1990 CLC 1188 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD RAMZAN
Side Opponent : N.-W.F.P.
N.-W.F.P. Local Government Ordinance 1979 ----S. 39---North-West Frontier
Province Local council s chairman and Vice chairman (Vote of No-Confidence)
Rules, 1980, R.3(4)---Motion of no confidence against chairman of union council
---Main grievance of petitioner was that concerned union council was comprised
of six members, including the petitioner who was elected as chairman ; that one
of the members having died and the other one having submitted his resignation,
said council was left comprised of four members only, thus quorum as required
under the Rules fell short of two-third of the members, of the council
---Petitioner's contention was untenable---Reasons stated.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD YAQOOB
Side Opponent : STATE
Pakistan Penal Code ----Ss. 302/34 & 304, Part I---Evidence, appreciation of
---Complainant and deceased were said to be present m the `Baithak' of the
complainant in connection with a family dispute when deceased was called by
the chairman union council to sign his declaration of assets as a council lor---
Conduct of the complainant to accompany the deceased was not natural---Person
who came to call the deceased and another witness cited in F.I.R. were not
produced--Witnesses produced were chance witnesses---chairman , Secretary
and Chowkidar of the union council though admittedly present at the spot were
not examined--Investigating of ficer admitted presence of three other persons at
the spot but those were also not examined---Compromise between parties was
affirmed by the. complainant and legal heirs of the deceased---Commission of
crime was proved on record but the truth was shrouded in mystery---of fence
would thus fall within ambit of S.304, Part I, P.P.C. and not under S.302. P.P.C,---
Conviction and sentence were aitered accordingly and sentence of five years
already undergone by the accused was considered sufficient to meet the ends of
justice in circumstances.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD ADIL
of fence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979 ---Ss. 16 & 10--
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199--Petitioner's wife was enticed away by
his real brother who married her allegedly on basis of forged Talaqnama--
Certificate issued by chairman , union council showed that Talaq was not
effective--Petitioner approached Police of ficer for registration of case but he did
not register same--Petitioner also approached higher Police of ficers but in vain--
Prima facie a cognizable of fence was allegedly disclosed against brother of
petitioner but police did not register case and as such failed to perform its
statutory duty as cast on it by virtue of S.154, Cr.P.C.--High Court in its
Constitutional jurisdiction directed that case be registered against brother of
petitioner under S.16/10 of Ordinance VII of 1979 and investigate same in
accordance with law.

Side Appellant : SARDAR KHAN
Side Opponent : DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
West Pakistan Waqf Properties (Administration) Rules 1960 ---8. 3 (b)--Notice of
Talaq which was to be given by husband to chairman of union council where
wife resided at time of Talaq, admittedly, not given--Noncompliance with
provisions regarding notice, held, would render divorce ineffective--Contention
of husband that separation took place between parties vide a divorce deed
would have no merit.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN OADRI
Side Opponent : RAZIA BEGUM
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 ---S. 2(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973),
Art. 199--Appointment of chairman -Challenge to--Contention that proceedings
held by chairman union council were coram non judice as he was not duly
appointed in accordance with law-Record showed that appointment of chairman
was made by Deputy Commissioner in exercise of powers conferred on him--
Petitioner in pursuance of notice issued by chairman , submitted himself to
jurisdiction of chairman , appointed his representative and had 1`seeri appearing
before him without any protest--Petitioner thus was estopped from raising-sir
plea and could not be permitted to invoke discretionary jurisdiction of High
Court challenging appointment of chairman in circumstances.

Side Appellant : HAKIM ALI
Pakistan Penal Code ---S. 2(b)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--
Appointment of chairman -Challenge to--Contention that proceedings held by
chairman union council were coram non judice as he was not duly appointed in
accordance with law-Record showed that appointment of chairman was made
by Deputy Commissioner in exercise of powers conferred on him--Petitioner in
pursuance of notice issued by chairman , submitted himself to jurisdiction of
chairman , appointed his representative and had 1`seeri appearing before him
without any protest--Petitioner thus was estopped from raising-sir plea and
could not be permitted to invoke discretionary jurisdiction of High Court
challenging appointment of chairman in circumstances.
Citation Name : 1989 CLC 1062 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Side Appellant : ZAKIR HUSSAIN SIDDIQUI
Side Opponent : NASIM BANO
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 ---S.6(4) s (5)--Muslim Family Laws
Rules,1961, R.21--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--of fence of bigamy--
Jurisdiction--Petitioner contracted second marriage during subsistence of his
marriage--Existing wife filed application before Civil Judge-cum-chairman of the
union council for taking cognizance of of fence of bigamy--Civil Judge returned
complaint holding that he was not competent--Deputy Commissioner on
revision held that case was triable by chairman , Arbitration council --Orders
Deputy Commissioner impugned--Held, Arbitration council was only for the
purposes of deciding application for permission to contract a second marriage
and thereafter its functions stopped--Complaint in respect of bigamy was to be
made by the union council to Magistrate concerned and by none else--Family
Judge or chairman had no jurisdiction having different entities in such cases
which were triable only by a Magistrate--Existing wife was directed to present
her complaint to the union council concerned.
Citation Name : 1989 PCRLJ 77 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Side Appellant : HUSSAIN ALI
Side Opponent : GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) ---S. 497(5)--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302,
148 & 149--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 4--Bail, cancellation of --Accused
allegedly caused Vahola and hatchet blows on deceased--Sessions Judge granting
bail to accused was led away by considerations not warranted in law and made
observations that one of the accused was a council lor and Vice-chairman ,
union council --Order cancelling bail was passed taking into consideration the
fact that people were not to be treated differently according to Islamic concept of
justice and fair-play and on basis of their high ranking personalities or belonging
to poorer class of society and nobody could pressurise Court and everybody was
equal before law.
Citation Name : 1988 PLD 23 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Side Opponent : MST. CHANO
Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act 1974 ---S.44--Azad Jammu
and Kashmir Local council (Vote of No-Confidence Against chairman . and
Vice-chairman ) Rules, 1980, Rr.4 & 5--Removal of chairman and Vice-chairman
by vote of no-confidence and election of new chairman and Vice-chairman
assailed by invoking constitutional jurisdiction of High Court--Denial of factum
of no-confidence motion and plea of invalidity of convening of special meeting
of union council not borne out by record--Requirement of notice for more than
seven days for convening of such special meeting complied with--Prescribed
procedure for passing vote of no-confidence against chairman and Vice-
chairman having been followed, passing of such motion against them, held, was
perfectly lawful and did not suffer from any flaw or infirmity rendering it to be
illegal or unlawful--Petitioners would cease to hold of fices of chairman and
Vice-chairman by passing of motion of no-confidence against them by two-third
majority of its total members--Active participation by petitioners in proceedings
of union council for election of new chairman and Vice-chairman would
amount to acquiescence and acceptance of their removal--Such participation
would preclude petitioners to seek remedy of discretionary constitutional
jurisdiction of High Court against their removal and election of new chairman
and Vice-chairman .
Citation Name : 1987 PLC 807 LABOUR-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-SINDH

Side Appellant : DIRECTOR, TELEGRAPH STORES AND WORKSHOP,
KARACHI
Side Opponent : MUHAMMAD YAQOOB
Industrial Relations Ordinance 1969 ---Ss.25-A & 38(3)--Retirement--Retirement
of workers ordered on basis of their dates of birth which were recorded in
Service Book as a result of opinion given by civil surgeon--Such dates of birth,
however, were changed after 11/15 years by competent authority after
condoning delay in view of School leaving certificate and certificate issued by
chairman union council --Retirement of workers on basis of former service
record, held, was premature, illegal and mala fide--Workers ordered to be
reinstated in service with full back benefits to work till attaining age of
superannuation according to revised entries of dates of birth.

Side Appellant : ABDUL GHANI
Pakistan Penal Code ---S.161--Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)--
Illegal gratification--Raid case--Accused, chairman of union council , accepting
bribe for settling matrimonial dispute--Inspector and raiding Magistrate
deposing of acceptance of tainted money by accused and its recovery from him--
Accused alleging before Magistrate, thrusting of money by complainant in his
pocket and admitting pendency of matrimonial dispute between complainant
and his wife before him-Thrusting of money denied by witnesses--Accused
taking up different plea at trial--Defence witnesses claiming to be present at time
of raid but not appearing before Magistrate--- Matter already settled between
complainant and accused, no conversation taking place at time of passing of
bribes money--Defence story being cooked up at later stage, guilt of accused,
held, was brought home to him--Conviction maintained in circumstances.

Side Appellant : MANZOOR HUSSAIN
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) ---S. 497--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 10 &
11--Bail, refusal of --Bail sought on ground that female accused had been
divorced by her husband (complainant) and she had contracted marriage with
male accused-Divorce deed relied upon by accused was alleged by complainant
to be a forged document--No notice of Talaq was sent to concerned chairman
union council --Father of female accused stating that she was never divorced by
complainant--Bail refused in circumstances.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD RAFIQ
Side Opponent : CHAIRMAN, ARBITRATION COUNCIL
West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 --S.21--Muslim Family Laws Ordinance
(VIII of 1961), Ss. 7 & 8- Dissolution of marriage--Khula -Return of benefits by
wife—Determination of such benefits--chairman of union council cannot go
behind decree granted by Family Court--chairman , after dissolution of marriage
by Family Court, has to proceed in accordance with provisions of S.21 of the Act
of 1964--chairman is not expected to adjudicate upon liability of wife to return
benefits to husband and in case of failure of reconciliation proceedings cannot
treat decree as ineffective on rights of the parties.

Side Appellant : NOOR HUSSAIN
Side Opponent : ELECTION TRIBUNAL
Punjab Local Government Ordinance 1979 ---Ss. 12(1) & 24(2)--Punjab Local
council s (Election Petitions) Rules, 1979, R.3(2)--Punjab Local council s (Election
Rules, 1979, R. 59(2)-Election of chairman of union council --Candidate for such
election-Eligibility--Election petition--Filing of -- Competency-- Candidate to of
fice of chairman of union council must be proposed by member other than
himself--Where, however none of members present proposed name of another
member as chairman , any member then present might propose his own name--
Such proposed member could become in law "candidate for election to of fice of
chairman "--Person neither was proposed by himself nor by his supporters as
they walked out of meeting convened for that purpose--Such person, held, was
not "candidate" for of fice of chairman --Election petition filed by such person
before Election Tribunal against elected chairman was incompetent in
circumstances.

Side Appellant : NOOR HUSSAIN
Side Opponent : ELECTION TRIBUNAL
Transfer of Property Act 1882 ---Ss. 12(1) & 24(2)--Punjab Local council s
(Election Petitions) Rules, 1979, R.3(2)--Punjab Local council s (Election Rules,
1979, R. 59(2)-Election of chairman of union council --Candidate for such
election-Eligibility--Election petition--Filing of -- Competency-- Candidate to of
fice of chairman of union council must be proposed by member other than
himself--Where, however none of members present proposed name of another
member as chairman , any member then present might propose his own name--
Such proposed member could become in law "candidate for election to of fice of
chairman "--Person neither was proposed by himself nor by his supporters as
they walked out of meeting convened for that purpose--Such person, held, was
not "candidate" for of fice of chairman --Election petition filed by such person
before Election Tribunal against elected chairman was incompetent in
circumstances.
Citation Name : 1986 CLC 1808 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD TAQI
Side Opponent : COUNCILLOR/CHAIRMAN, UNION COUNCIL
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 S. 7--Divorce--Petitioner sending written
divorce to his wife with an intimation to chairman , union council --chairman
initiating proceedings and both husband and wife appearing before him but
instead of confirming divorce chairman directing parties to get their dispute
settled from Superior Courts--Divorce given to wife and duly communicated to
chairman , held, was effective after ninety days and same could not be
cancelled--Order of chairman is required directing parties to get their dispute
settled from Superior Court was illegal and a superfluous act on part of
chairman --Incumbent upon chairman is required to decide matter in accordance
with provisions of S. 7 of Ordinance--Parties directed to appear before chairman
who would decide matter according to law after affording opportunity to parties.

Side Appellant : CAROLINE REHMAN
Side Opponent : CHAIRMAN UNION COUNCIL
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 ---S.7--Christian Marriage Act (XV of 1872),
S.79--Delegation of right of divorce to wife--Exercise of such right by wife--
Notice of Talaq-Non-cognizance by chairman ---husband being Muslim was
governed by his own personal law in matter of divorce--Christian wife exercising
her right of divorce delegated to her by Muslim husband had sent notice of
Talaq--Refusal of chairman , union council to take cognizance of said notice,
held, was illegal and without lawful authority--Case remanded to chairman for
proceeding according to law.

Side Appellant : UNION COUNCIL NO. 16, TEHSIL KHUSHAB
Side Opponent : HABIB TEXTILE MILLS
Punjab Local council s (Taxation) Rules 1980 --Rr. 5(2), 6 & 7--union council
proposing tax on import of goods-- Assistant Commissioner, in appeal, doubting
correctness of union council 's record setting aside imposition of tax and
directing union council to proceed afresh in matter--union council challenging
such order and alleging fulfilment of all formalities--Proceedings of such
Committee of union council bearing attestation by chairman and signatures of
all members in meeting--Remaining four members of Sub-Committee submitting
counter-affidavit to one submitted by Convener of taxation Sub-Committee--
Held, Assistant Commissioner was hasty in rejecting record on solitary affidavit
of a member contradicted by his own signature on record of proceedings.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD TUFAIL
Side Opponent : DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, SIALKOT
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 ---Ss. 6(5) & 7--Divorce--Effectiveness--
Taiaq becomes effective after expiry of ninety days from date on which notice of
Talaq issued by husband delivered to chairman union council unless wife
happens to be pregnant at time Talaq is pronounced and in that event Talaq
would become effective at end of pregnancy--Effectiveness of Talaq, held, not
dependent upon passing any order by chairman or Deputy Commissioner--
Husband remarrying after ninety days of delivering notice of Talaq to chairman
of union council --chairman passing order that since husband had neither
appeared before him nor nominated his representative to Arbitration council
--Talaq could not be declared effective--Order of chairman , held, not tenable
and proceedings of case pending against petitioner under S.6(5) of Ordinance for
taking a second wife during subsistence of his first marriage declared to be
without lawful authority.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN
Side Opponent : A. C./RETURNING OFFICER
-- Art. 9-Punjab Local council s (Election) Rules, 1979, r. 40(7)Election--chairman
ship of union council --Both parties getting equal votes and agreeing to decide
result by throwing a toss--No illegality, held, can be found in mode adopting by
Presiding of ficer to decide result by tossing a coin- Petitioner, having taken a
chance to toss but luck not favouring him, has to accept result of his own choice.

Side Appellant : GHULAM RASOOL
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) ---Ss. 497/498/439 a 514--Bail--Cancellation
for default--Forfeiture of surety bond--Accused granted bail but was kidnapped
and consequently remained absent from trial Court on date of appearance--
Surety producing certificate from chairman , of union council that accused was
got released after date of appearance when he surrendered and explained his
position--Order of trial Court requiring surety to deposit penalty, held, not
legally sustainable as trial Court failed to apply- its mind to material brought on
record by surety as well as accused.
Side Appellant : FARRUKH BEG
Side Opponent : SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, CENTRAL. KARACHI
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) -S. 561-A-Muslim Family Laws Ordinance
(VIII of 1961), S. 6 "union council " and chairman union council ," two different
entities-union council competent to file complaint under S. 6, Muslim Family
Laws Ordinance, 1961-Complaint filed by "chairman " of union council ,
quashed.

Side Appellant : FARRUKH BEG
Side Opponent : SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, CENTRAL. KARACHI
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 -S. 561-A-Muslim Family Laws Ordinance
(VIII of 1961), S. 6 "union council " and chairman union council ," two different
entities-union council competent to file complaint under S. 6, Muslim Family
Laws Ordinance, 1961-Complaint filed by "chairman " of union council ,
quashed.

Side Appellant : ABDUL KARIM
Side Opponent : ABDUL SHAKOOR
Code of Civil Procedure 1908 ---S. 115--West Pakistan Urban Rent Restriction
Ordinance (VI of 1959), S.17--Ejectment--Revisional jurisdiction--Dispute over
ownership of property--Landlord shown in record of Excise and Taxation
Department as owner of disputed property and petitioner as its tenant-Landlord
showing that dispute between parties was referred to chairman of union council
before whom parties compromised, whereby tenant agreed to pay a monthly
rent to landlord--Oral evidence of witnesses produced by landlord relied by
appellate Court in preference to oral evidence produced by tenant--Finding of
appellate Court that landlord was owner of disputed property, held, not liable to
interference in revisional jurisdiction in circumstances.

Side Appellant : ABDUL KARIM
Side Opponent : ABDUL SHAKOOR
Evidence Act 1872 ---Ss. 22 & 116--Admission--Estoppel of tenant--Document
consisting of a compromise deed reduced into writing before chairman of a
union council before whom parties compromised was not relied upon for
purpose of enforcing it as an arbitration award but merely as an admission on
part of tenant--Execution of such document proved on record--Document, held,
admissible as an admission and in view of statement made in such document by
tenant that he was tenant of respondent (landlord)--Tenant, held, was estopped
from challenging title of landlord of disputed property--West Pakistan Urban
Rent Restriction Ordinance (VI of 1959), S.17.
Side Appellant : UTMA
Side Opponent : PUNJAB LOCAL COUNCILS ELECTION AUTHORITY
Art. 9 (1) (b) (ii)-Quo warranto"-Writ of -Voter in constituency not "elected
member" of union council at time of filing writ petition, praying for issuance of
writ of "quo warranto" under Fl. (1) (b) of Art. 9-Held, voter not debarred from
challenging election of chairman of his constituency.-[Locus standi].

Side Appellant : THE STATE
Side Opponent : IQBAL HUSSAIN
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) ----S. 417-.-Appeal against acquittal-Evidence,
appreciation of Account Books of union council not maintained in accordance
with union council Account Rules-Cash book though required to be checked by
chairman , item by item yet not checked and over all responsibility continuing to
be that of chairman -Accused Secretary of union council , held, rightly given
benefit of doubt and acquitted, in circumstances-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.
409.-[Appeal against acquittal-Evidence-Benefit of doubt].

Side Appellant : FATEH MUHAMMAD
Side Opponent : CHAIRMAN, UNION COMMITTEE, WARD NO. 14/15,
SHALAMAR TOWN, LAHORE
Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C) ---S. 561-A read with Muslim Family Laws
Rules, 1961, r. 21Quashment of proceedings-Complaint for bigamy lodged by a
chairman , union Committee, challenged on ground that only union council was
competent to lodge such complaint-No provision of law existing for nomination
of persons or bodies of persons to perform functions of union council s-
Complaint lodged by a person designated as chairman , held, no valid-
Proceedings quashed in circumstances.[Complaint-Bigamy].

Side Appellant : STATE
Side Opponent : IQBAL HUSSAIN
Pakistan Penal Code --- S. 409 read with Prevention of Corruption Act (II of
1947), S. 161 read with West Pakistan union council Account Rules, 1960, r.16-
Criminal misappropriation---Persons producing receipts allegedly issued by
accused denying same having been issued by accused-Accounts of Town
Committee required by Rules to be checked item by item by chairman of
Committee with reference to receipts and vouchers and to be attested by
chairman -chairman of Committee stating no defalcation in account having been
ever reported to him-Prosecution, held, failed to establish case against accused.
Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD YOUSAF
Side Opponent : CHAIRMAN, UNION COMMITTEE, WARD No. 7/8, KOT
KHAWAJA SAEED, LAHORE
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 --- Ss. 2(d) & 7(1), (2) and West Pakistan
Family Laws Rules, r. 21 read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561-
A-Quashment of proceedings-Criminal prosecution-Cognizance" union council "
as defined in S. 2(d) of Ordinance-Neither synonymous nor inclusive of
expression "chairman "-Complaint filed by chairman and not by union council
as required under r. 21 of Rules Magistrate not competent to take cognizance-
Contention that petitioner, having sent notice to chairman after 18 days of
pronouncement of talaq, was liable under S. 7(2) of Ordinance No time limit
having peen fixed under S. 7(1) for sending notice to chairman , petitioner, held,
could not be prosecuted under S.7(2; of Ordinance-Proceedings quashed, in
circumstances. [Quashment of proceedings].
Citation Name : 1971 PCRLJ 707 DHAKA-HIGH-COURT

Side Appellant : TAMIZUDDIN AHMED ALIAS TAMIZUDDIN
Pakistan Penal Code --- S. 409--Criminal breach of trust-Shortage discovered and
not accounted for in quantity of wheat entrusted to union council for
distribution among poor-Besides accused, one other member, and even chairman
of council found to have had access to godown and to have been distributing
wheat among poor and key remaining with chairman -Mere fact that accused
carried wheat for storage in godown, held, not, in circumstances, sufficient to
prove accused's exclusive dominion over property or his dishonest intention-
Accused acquitted.
Citation Name : 1970 PLD 589 DHAKA-HIGH-COURT

Side Appellant : A. M. A. ZAMAN
Side Opponent : THE GOVERNMENT OF EAST PAKISTAN REPRESENTED
BY THE SECRETARY
East Pakistan Local council s (Vote of No-Confidence) Rules 1963 r. 4-chairman ,
union council upon receipt of requisition from members to call special meeting
to consider no-confidence motion himself calling special meeting without notice
to Controlling Authority and holding such meeting under his own chairman
ship-Controlling Authority subsequently convening and holding special meeting
within second fortnight of receipt of requisition notice---Meeting held by
Controlling Authority, in circumstances, held, perfectly valid.

Side Appellant : MD. NURUL HAQUE JOARDAR
Side Opponent : THE PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN AND 4 OTHERS
East Pakistan union council s and Town and union Committees (Election of
chairman ) Rules 1965 r. 12-Ballot-papersAppellate authority competent to
consider defects in ballot-papers---Votes, however, being valuable property
cannot be rejected without affording opportunity to refute allegation of defect-
Principle of natural justice.

Side Appellant : AFTAB HOSSAIN
Side Opponent : THE PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN AND 2 OTHERS
Electoral College Act 1964 S. 57 read with Basic Democracies Order [P. O. No. 18
of 1959], Art. 22-Constitution of union council s-Powers of Provincial
Government do not exhaust once union council s are constituted after formation
of Electoral College but continue and union council s can be reconstituted by
Provincial Government-Article 22, Basic Democracies Order, 1959, held, no bar to
exercise of powers of Provincial Government to reconstitute a union council
-chairman , union council losing his of fice 'due to reconstitution of union
council , held, can have no grievance on that account.

Side Appellant : MAZHARUL HUQ
Side Opponent : ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, CHITTAGONG
chairman ) Rules 1965 rr. 10 & 11-. Election petition-Quasi-judicial matter-
Deputy Commissioner acting in such quasi judicial capacity could not take
guidance under any circumstance from any communication made to him by way
of clarification by Government-Deputy Commissioner, held, should in such
matters, act independently according to his best judgment, knowledge, good
conscience and rules governing matter-of ficers acting in judicial or quasi judicial
capacities being guided by executive orders Practice disapproved.

Side Appellant : MAZHARUL HUQ
Side Opponent : ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER, CHITTAGONG
Election ---Consent or withdrawal of candidature-Law not requiring consent to
be given in writing or by mouth-Silence of ' person proposed and seconded may
be construed as implied consent--Refusal and/or express unwillingness to
contest election by person proposed and seconded-Amounts to withdrawal even
though no express provisions exist in law forgiving consent or withdrawal of
candidature-East Pakistan union council s and Town and union Committees
(Election of chairman ) Rules, 1965.

Side Appellant : DAKHINA RANJAN BARUA
Side Opponent : SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHITTAGONG, & M.
RAHMAN, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES
Constitution of Pakistan 1962 Art. 98(2)-"Other adequate remedy"-[Election of
chairman of union Committee]-Held, the other adequate remedy was available
under rr. 10, 11, 12, 13, East Pakistan union council s and Town and union
Committees (Election of chairman ) Rules, 1965 - Rules, self-contained
[Application under Art. 98 instituted by a member of Committee; an application
by defeated candidate, in fact, was already pending under r. 10 before Collector]-
Application for writ dismissed--Position would not be same if applicant under
Art. 98 was an ordinary citizen and not a member of Committee or council
--Finality of order, in dispute petition under the Rules, leaves High Court's
jurisdiction under Art. 98 unaffected.

Side Appellant : KHADIM HUSSAIN
Evidence Act 1872 ---S. 24-Extra-judicial confession-chairman of union council
under Basic Democracies Order (18 of 1959), Art. 29-Held, "person in authority"
within S. 24-Extrajudicial confession made to such person on inducement-
Excluded from consideration.
Citation Name : 1968 PCRLJ 332 DHAKA-HIGH-COURT

Side Appellant : MOHIUDDIN AHMAD
Pakistan Penal Code -----S. 409 read with Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment)
Act (XL of 1958), Ss. 2 & 6 (5) and East Pakistan Criminal Law (Amendment)
Rules, r. 3-Criminal breach of trust by "public servant"-Prosecution of "elected"
chairman of union council -Previous sanction of "appropriate Department of
Provincial Government" necessary--Sanction given by "Controlling authority"-
Not valid-Trial in pursuance of such sanction Held, without jurisdiction-Basic
Democracies Order (18 of 1959), Art. 79-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 21.

Side Appellant : AFAZUDDIN AHMED
Side Opponent : DIVISIONAL COMMISSIONER, RAJSHAHI AND OTHERS
Basic Democracies Order 1959 S. 25 read with Second Sch., Part 11, para. 2 (e)
and East Pakistan Local council s (Resignation and Removal of Members and
chairman and Suspension of chairman ) Rules, rr. 4 & 6(4)-Removal of member/
chairman from union Committee-Principle audi alteram partem, applies-Special
Meeting of representative members of District council convened for purpose and
notice "for information" only sent to person sought to be removed-Held,
principle of audi alteram partem violated.
Citation Name : 1966 PLD 854 SUPREME-COURT

Side Appellant : PROVINCE OF EAST PAKISTAN
Side Opponent : SIRAJUL HAQ PATWARI
Electoral College Act 1964 S. 57 read with Art. 158(4), Constitution of Pakistan
(1962)-Section 57 not ultra vires the National Assembly but within its legislative
competence-Not imperative for "National Assembly to lay down principles,
policies or norms" in delegating functions of local Government to Provincial
Government-Electoral College Act, 1964 is a "direct" implementation of
constitutional provisions contained in Chapter 2, Part VII, Constitution of
Pakistan (1962)- Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 159 read with S. 52,
Electoral College Act (IV of 1964)-Absence of reference, in form of oath
prescribed for members of Electoral College, to powers of local Government
does not show that importance is not placed by Constitution upon investment of
such members with such powers-Principles formulated and general instructions
issued by East Pakistan Government in implementation of S. 57-Legislative
guidelines not "really indispensable" in constituting "pockets" of local
Government-Constitution o Pakistan (1962), Arts. 131, 132 & 133, Third Schedule,
items 35 48 & 49-Subject of S. 57, Electoral College Act, 1964 falls within scope of
item 48 rather than 49 read with item 35-Words and phrases-Words "incidental",
"ancillary", indicative, of "things of lesser or subordinate degree or of
consequential nature" Section 57 within legislative competence of National
Assembly by virtue of Art. 158(4), Constitution of Pakistan (1962)-Constitution
of Pakistan (1962), Arts. 131, 132 & 133(1)-Matters in Third Schedule within
"exclusive power" of Central Legislature, but such power may extend beyond
these matters - Provincial Legislature has not "exclusive" power to make laws
within its own field-"Express" declaration in terms of Art. 13](2) not required by
Center to enable it to make laws with respect to matters not enumerated in Third
Schedule-Presumption as to legislative competence raised by Art. 133(1)-
Constitution of Pakistan (1962) Art. 134-National Assembly law cannot be
invalidated by repugnancy to a Provincial Law-National Assembly can "never
legislate ineffectively"-National Assembly legislating under Art. 131(2) does not
remove a subject "exclusively" to its own legislative field Such a law can be
amended or repealed later by the Provincial Assembly-Validity of laws made by
various Legislatures not to be tested with reference to power derived from Arts.
131 to 134 "as a theoretical proposition" Law made in "proper form" is to be
"accepted as a fact"-Interpretation of statutes- Rules, by which conflict of laws,
under a Federal Constitution, are to be resolved-Rule of "pith and substance"-
Rule of "occupied field"-Rule of validation of a law of a Legislature making
"incidental and necessary encroachments" on exclusive powers of another
Legislature-Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 142read with item 5, Third
Schedule- Significance of Art. 142, imposing a check upon law-making power of
Provinces with respect to inter-Provincial and foreign trade, with reference to
item 5, Third Schedule-Caution with reference to obiter dicta nature of
observations with regard to Arts. 131 to 134, excepting Art. 131(1) read with item
48, Third Schedule-Electoral College Act (IV of 1964), S.57-Does not involve any
concept of "excessive delegation"-"Guidelines" not a "legislative imperative" in
delegating administrative functions (of local Government) to Provincial
Government-Rule of excessive delegation to be applied with "greatest
circumspection"-Basic Democracies (Amendment) Act (XVI of 1965) not a
"mechanical misfit", being directly connected with S. 57, Electoral -College Act-
Legislation represented by S.57 required by the Constitution to be under taken
by the National Assembly-Interpretation of statutes "Injection" of bodies
constituted under one law into fabric of another law for performance of
functions laid down in such other law pot unknown to modern legislation-East
Pakistan union council s union Committees (Election of chairman ) Rules; 1965
not ultra vires the Provincial Government-Basic Democracies Order (18 of 1959),
Arts. 11(1), 12(1) cg 89 and Sixth Schedule, item 3, repeal of , and item 25-Effect-
Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 158(4)-Term "law" construed as including
rules Interpretation of statutes-Statutory rule has effect as law Administrative
action, whether taken within lawful authority Question should be examined in
light of "background" of affair bar, and entire history of earlier administrative
arrangement and law on which they were based-Maxim: ut res magis valeat,
quam pereat the affair should prosper rather than be brought to destruction",
adapplied-Maxim: fiat justitia rust coelum "let justice prevail though the heavens
should fall"-Conflict of opinion between Legislature and Court in matter having
impact on whole country Duty of Court to examine "full background" and to act
so as "matter should be advanced rather than it should be brought to an end

Side Appellant : SHERAJUL HAQUE PATWARI
Side Opponent : SUB-DIVISIONAL OFFICER, CHANDPUR
chairman ) Rules 1965 -Ultra vires the Provincial Government's rule-making
power wider Art. 89, Basic Democracies Order (18 of 1959)-Electoral College Act
(IV of 1964), S.57-Basic Democracies Order (18 of 1959), Art. 3(51), (53) & (54) as
amended by Basic Democracies (Amendment) Act (XVI of 1965), S. 2(e)-Basic
Democracies Order (18 of 1959), Arts. 11(1), (5) & .12(1), (5), Sixth Schedule, item
(3) as they existed before amendment by Act (XVI of 1965)Constitution of
Pakistan (1962), Art. 98.

Side Appellant : MST. SAID KHANAM
Side Opponent : ABDUL JABBAR
Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961 S. 5 (2) read with West Pakistan Conciliation
Courts Rules, 1962, r. 13(1)chairman of union council unable to act as chairman
of Conciliation Court-Controlling Authority alone competent to appoint another
member as chairman -Appointment of chairman , in such case, by members
themselves-Improper.
Citation Name : 1964 PLD 461 SUPREME-COURT
Side Appellant : SH. ABDUR RAHMAN, ADVOCATE, BAHAWALNAGAR
Side Opponent : THE COLLECTOR AND DEPUTY COMMISSIONER,
BAHAWALNAGAR
Basic Democracies Order 1959 Art. 25(4)(c) read with Art. 15(2)-Removal of
chairman of union Committee by resolution of members of District council
-.Three members, taking part in proceedings for removal appointed to such
council ex-of ficio as Vice-Presidents of Municipal Committees, and not as
Chairmen of union Committees, though they happened to be such Chairmen
also-Such members, held, not entitled to vote-One such member, who presided
at meeting, alleged to be responsible for manoeuvring proceedings for removal-
Voting by such members not a "mere" irregularity in proceedings - Meeting of
District council , held "illegal"--Subsequent meeting, "confirming" resolution,
made no difference.

Side Appellant : CH. SADIQ ALI
Side Opponent : COLLECTOR GUJRANWALA
Basic Democracies Order 1959 Basic Democracies Order (No. 18 of 1959) [as
amended by Basic Democracies Order (West Pakistan Amendment) Ordinance
(XXXV of 1963)], Art. II (S-A) read with Basic Democracies (Second Amendment)
Order [President's Order No. 22 of 1962], Art. 20-Composition of Local council s-
Removal of chairman --Expression "if vote of no-confidence is passed . . . by two-
third majority of total number of members" occurring in Art. 11 (S-A) of
President's Order No. 18 of 1959-Words "total number of members" Cannot be
interpreted as referring to members other than "elected members", nor can
include "appointed members" continued as members by Art. 20 of President's
Order No. 22 of 1962-Purpose of Art. 20 of President's Order No. 22 of 1962--To
extend membership of existing "appointed members" until union council s etc.
reconstituted in accordance with President's Order No. 18 of 1959Person other
than those "appointed" before enactment of Art. 20 of President's Order No. 22 of
1962-Cannot be said to constitute members of union council -West Pakistan
Basic Democracies (Vote of No-confidence Against chairman ) Rules, 1963, rr. 3
& 6.
Citation Name : 1963 PLD 382 SUPREME-Court

Side Appellant : IMTIAZ AHMAD
Side Opponent : GHULAM ALI
Writ Other (Special) remedy given by statute-Must be (ordinarily) availed of
before invoking writ jurisdiction of High Court [Fazle-Akbar, J., Cornelius, C. J.
agreeing; Kaikaus, J. (contra)] - (Election case) - Constitution of Pakistan (1956),
Art. 170--(Mala fides alleged in Presiding of ficer at election of chairman , union
council ).
Side Appellant : Syed TARIQ ALI through General-Attorney
Side Opponent : ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAWALPINDI
---S. 5 & Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional
petition---Suit for recovery of dower amount, dowry articles and maintenance
---All three cases were consolidated by Family Court and consolidated issues
were framed---Cases were fixed for cross-examination of witnesses of plaintiffs,
but counsel for defendants having failed to appear, ex parte proceedings were
initiated against defendants and case was adjourned for ex parte arguments---
Application for setting aside ex parte proceedings filed by defendants was
dismissed and Family Court after hearing ex parte arguments decreed all three
suits vide ex parte judgment/decree---Appeal filed by defendants against
judgment and decree of Family Court having been dismissed by Appellate
Court, defendants had filed Constitutional petition---Validity---Interim order of
Family Court had revealed that defendants were allowed five opportunities to
cross-examine witnesses of plaintiffs but on each occasion, needful was not
done---On one occasion adjournment was granted subject to payment of heavy
costs, but despite that none had appeared on behalf of defendants, where-after
no other option was left with the Family Court except to proceed ex parte---ln
absence of any sufficient cause for non-appearance of defendants or anybody
else on their behalf, ex parte proceedings could not have been set aside---
Plaintiffs had produced ex parte evidence in support of their claim in plaints and
they had proved their entitlement to maintenance allowance, outstanding dower
amount and of dowry articles lying with the defendant---Both Family Court and
Appellate Court had not committed any illegality and judgments returned by
both Courts were not arbitrary/fanciful---Just decision taken by a competent
Court within the ambit of conferred jurisdiction, could not be substituted in
Constitutional petition.

Side Appellant : SAADIA BEGUM
Side Opponent : JANGREEZ and 3 others
----S. 5 & Sched.---Dissolution of Muslim Marriages’ Act (VIII of 1939), S.2(viii)(a)
(b) & (f)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199--Constitutional petition---
Dissolution of marriage on ground of Khula'--Validity---Suit for dissolution of
marriage, recovery of dower, dowry and maintenance ---Both Family Court and
Appellate Court granted decree for dissolution of marriage in favour of plaintiff
on ground of Khula', while her prayer for dower, dowry and maintenance were
dismissed---maintenance decree was granted to the extent of minor son only---
Plaintiff had alleged that Family Court was not vested with powers to waive off
her demand of dower, dowry, maintenance and pass decree for dissolution of
marriage on basis of Khula' of its own when plaintiff had prayed for dissolution
of marriage on ground of cruelty of defendant towards her---Plaintiff in her
Side Appellant : Mst. SHAGUFTA SHEHNAZ
Side Opponent : ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, SAHIWAL
---Ss.5, Sched. & 14---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional
petition---Two separate suits for recovery of dower amount and for maintenance
allowance---Single appeal; competency of -- Plaintiff (wife) filed two suits in
Family Court against defendant; one for recovery of dower and expenses
incurred on delivery of children and second for the maintenance allowance for
herself and for children-- Family Court consolidated two suits and by one
judgment, decreed one suit to the extent of dowry only while her claim
regarding delivery expenses was dismissed and in the second suit maintenance
allowance to the extent of children was granted, but claim of plaintiff for
maintenance allowance was rejected---Plaintiff being aggrieved by judgment of
Family Court filed single appeal against said consolidated judgment assailing it
on the ground that quantum of maintenance granted to minor children was less
and dismissal of her claim regarding maintenance and recovery of delivery
charges was illegal---Appellate Court dismissed appeal filed by plaintiff on the
ground that single appeal was not competent and two separate appeals should
have been filed for obtaining different reliefs claimed by plaintiff ---Validity--
Provisions of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, other than Ss.10 & 11 thereof being
inapplicable to the proceedings before Family forums, technical objection of
filing a single appeal against consolidated judgment, when it was directed
against decision in both the suits would not come in the way of adjudication---
High Court accepted the Constitutional petition by plaintiff, set aside judgment
of Appellate ,Court with direction to decide the appeal afresh in accordance with
law.
Citation Name : 2003 YLR 3097 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Side Appellant : PARVEEN UMAR
Side Opponent : SARDAR HUSSAIN
----S. 5, Sched. & S.14---Suit for recovery of dower and maintenance ---Plaintiff
on being divorced, filed suit against defendant for recovery of dower according
to terms of Nikahnama and for maintenance ---Family Court granted decree for
recovery of cash amount of Rs.50,000 as dower along-with five Marlas plot
according to terms mentioned in the Nikahnama---Trial Court also granted
maintenance allowance to the plaintiff-- Appellate Court on filing appeal against
judgment and decree of Family Court disallowed the cash amount of dower of
Rs.50,000 taking the view that if Rs.50,000 in cash as a dower was not paid, only
then plaintiff would be entitled to the plot and that plaintiff was entitled to plot
only--Nikahnama revealed that three kinds of dowers were to be granted to
plaintiff; firstly Rs.50,000 in cash; secondly thirty Tolas gold ornament and
thirdly five Marlas plot--Relevant column in Nikahnama did not contain any
stipulation that said three kinds of dower were alternative arrangements and
that one would exclude the other ---Appellate Court in circumstances had clearly
misdirected itself in drawing an inference, which was fallacious and could not be
sustained---Terms of Nikahnama provided that all three kinds of dower were
agreed upon and fixed to be paid---dower amount of Rs.50,000 in cash was
rightly decreed by the Family Court after appraisal of evidence on record and
Appellate Court had interfered with such findings of Family Court for no valid
and legal reason---Findings of Appellate Court were set aside and plaintiff was
entitled to recover amount of Rs.50,000 as part of dower like five Marlas plot.

Side Appellant : SAIQA
Side Opponent : ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAWALPINDI
West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 ----S. 5 & Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan
(1973) Art.199-----Constitutional petition-----Dissolution of marriage on ground
of Khula'---Suit for recovery of dower and maintenance allowance by wife---
Family Court consolidated all the three suits anti decreed them, but decree for
dissolution of marriage through Khula'was passed subject to return of received
dower amount and foregoing unpaid dower amount and " maintenance decreed
in favour of wife--Validity---dower whether paid or unpaid could never be in the
nature of a benefit or gift liable to be restored in consideration of granting
Khula'divorce---Impugned order was not -sustainable to the extent of making
grant of Khula subject to condition of repayment of paid amount of dower by
wife to husband and to obligate her to forego unpaid dower amount---Family
Court had itself found wife entitled to maintenance ---Such maintenance was
neither in nature of a gift or benefit, but was an undeniable legal obligation of
husband to maintain his wife which he could not avoid without any just cause---
Such would be a contradiction in terms, if on one hand, Court found a wife
legally entitled to claim maintenance and on other hand directed her to forego
same in lieu of Khula'---High Court accepted Constitutional petition and upheld
the decree for dissolution of marriage through Khula'while striking down said
conditions thereto.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN
Side Opponent : RAJ BIBI
West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 Ss. 5, Sched., 14 & 19---Court Fees Act (VII
of 1870), S.7(ii)--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199---Constitutional
petition---Suit for recovery of dowry articles---Deficiency in court-fee---Suit for
recovery of dowry articles by wife having been decreed, husband filed appeal
against same which was dismissed on the ground that he had failed to make up
deficiency in court-fee as per direction of the Appellate Court---Contention of
husband was that suit for recovery of dowry being included in Sched. of West
Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, no court-fee was required to be paid and
court-fee of R.15 having been affixed on plaint as well as on memo of appeal no
further court-fee was required on memo of appeal---Plaint was rightly stamped
according to S.19 of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 and provisions of
S.7(ii) of Court Fees Act, 1870, which were applicable to the plaint regarding
maintenance and annuities etc. were not applicable to appeal arising out of
decree passed by Family Court and court-fee on memo of appeal was to be paid
according to the value of subject-matter of appeal determined on date of
decree---Amount payable under decree which was subject-matter of appeal,
exceeded Rs.25,000, court-fee was to be paid on decretal amount which was
subject-matter of appeal---Husband having failed to make up deficiency in court-
fee as per direction of the Court his appeal was rightly dismissed---Husband had
prayed that if he was granted time to make up deficiency in court-fee, he would
make up the deficiency--Respondent having no objection if opportunity was
granted to petitioner for making up deficiency in court-fee and his appeal be
decided on merits, order dismissing appeal was set aside and appeal before
Appellate Court was deemed to be pending and husband was ordered to make
up deficiency in specified period and to decide appeal on merits:

Side Appellant : ANEES AHMAD
Side Opponent : UZMA
West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 S. 5-.& Sched.---Constitution of Pakistan
(1973), Art.199---Constitutional jurisdiction---Marriage under Khula' was
dissolved on account of cruelty of husband ---Family Court could have refused
to grant any compensation whatsoever---Family Court, however, had decreed
wife's suit on ground of Khula' subject to foregoing right of maintenance
allowance which had been granted to wife in separate suit---Husband was, thus,
given consideration for Khula' in tangible terms---Trial Court had found on basis
of material on record that husband was not entitled to dower, decree whereof
had been granted to wife against him---Orders passed by Trial Court being
perfectly valid orders, same could not be interfered within Constitutional
jurisdiction.

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD IQBAL KOCUB
Side Opponent : JUDGE, FAMILY COURT, LAHORE
West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964 S.5 & Sched.---Dissolution of marriage on
ground of Khula'---Marriage of spouses took place about seven years back, but
they lived together only for a period of three months---Spouses were not
previous relations and no issue was from wedlock---Litigation had reached up to
level of High Court and serious allegations relating to character had been
levelled during course of proceedings of rival suits between parties---Ample
evidence was on record to prove that parties could not live together as husband
and wife within limits of Allah--Court, in circumstances, rightly granted decree
for dissolution of marriage on ground of Khula` provided wife relinquished her
claim for payment of amount of dower and maintenance and returned the
amount of ornaments received by her from her husband .

Chairman Union Council

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chairman Union Council

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Citation Name : 2006 YLR 2515 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Side Appellant : MUHAMMAD ALI

Citation Name : 2006 CLC 1544 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2006 YLR 549 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2006 YLR 335 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2006 CLC 554 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2006 CLC 479 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2006 MLD 89 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 2005 PLD 644 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2005 CLC 1816 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2005 PLD 358 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 2004 YLR 1979 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Citation Name : 2004 YLR 1791 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2004 YLR 619 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-Court

Citation Name : 2003 PLD 169 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Citation Name : 2003 YLR 2445 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 2002 MLD 778 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1999 CLC 88 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1998 CLC 1585 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1997 PCRLJ 1655 FEDERAL-SHARIAT-Court

Citation Name : 1995 PCRLJ 1247 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1995 PCRLJ 1072 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1995 MLD 34 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1994 CLC 1669 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1993 CLC 1869 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1993 CLC 1834 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1993 CLC 1331 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1992 CLC 395 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Citation Name : 1992 CLC 1185 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1992 PCRLJ 1193 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1992 PCRLJ 547 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1992 PCRLJ 547 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1991 MLD 1498 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1990 CLC 1188 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT-NWFP

Citation Name : 1990 PCRLJ 905 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1989 PCRLJ 2175 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1989 MLD 2510 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1989 MLD 905 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1989 MLD 886 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1989 CLC 1062 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1989 PCRLJ 77 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1988 PLD 23 SUPREME-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Citation Name : 1987 PLC 807 LABOUR-APPELLATE-TRIBUNAL-SINDH

Citation Name : 1987 MLD 3107 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1986 PCRLJ 2877 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1986 CLC 1722 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1986 MLD 666 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1986 MLD 666 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1986 CLC 1808 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1985 CLC 2855 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1985 CLC 1930 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1985 MLD 1179 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1984 CLC 1286 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1984 PCRLJ 2652 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1984 PCRLJ 111 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1984 MLD 559 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1984 MLD 559 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1980 PCRLJ 66 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1979 PCRLJ 123 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Citation Name : 1979 PCRLJ 772 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Citation Name : 1971 PCRLJ 707 DHAKA-HIGH-COURT

Citation Name : 1970 PLD 589 DHAKA-HIGH-COURT

Citation Name : 1970 PLD 369 DHAKA-HIGH-COURT