| Case ID |
027684ae-b291-4913-ac7c-0d8410af86a3 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Writ Petition No. 21133 of 2010 |
| Decision Date |
Jul 26, 2011 |
| Hearing Date |
Jun 17, 2011 |
| Decision |
The petition has been dismissed by the Lahore High Court. The court upheld the decision of the District Judge, Gujrat, who ruled that the gold ornaments mentioned in the Nikahnama are bridal gifts and not part of the dower. Therefore, the respondent is not required to return the gold ornaments upon the dissolution of marriage through khula. The court emphasized that 'dower' under the Family Courts Act, 1964 does not include bridal gifts and maintaining this distinction prevents undue financial liability on the petitioner and protects the rights of the respondent in marital dissolution cases. |
| Summary |
In the significant legal case of Writ Petition No. 21133 of 2010, the Lahore High Court addressed key issues concerning the interpretation of 'dower' under the Family Courts Act, 1964, within the context of marital dissolution through khula. Decided on July 26, 2011, after hearings that concluded on June 17, 2011, the case involved petitioner SHAKEEL SAOOD KHAN seeking the dissolution of marriage with respondent RIZWANA KHANUM on the grounds of cruelty and khula. The central dispute revolved around whether the gold ornaments given as part of the marriage contract (detailed in the Nikahnama) were considered part of the dower or were independent bridal gifts. Initially, the Family Court decreed that Rs.5,000 was due as Haq Mehr and the 13 tolas of gold ornaments were to be returned. However, upon appeal, the District Judge of Gujrat modified this judgment, determining that the gold ornaments were bridal gifts and therefore not subject to return under khula. The Lahore High Court upheld this decision, clarifying that under Section 10(4) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, 'dower' should retain its specific legal meaning and not be extended to include personal bridal gifts. The court's decision was influenced by previous cases such as Shahnaz Begum v. Muhammad Shafi and Najeeb Ullah v. Mst. Makhdoom Akhtar, which reinforced the separation of contractual dower from personal gifts. This judgment not only solidifies the clear legal demarcation between dower and bridal gifts but also safeguards women's rights during marital dissolution by ensuring that personal gifts are not unjustly reclaimed. The court's ruling mandates that dower stands as a distinct financial obligation, preventing potential financial exploitation and providing clarity in the dissolution process. Legal practitioners and individuals involved in family law may find this case particularly relevant for its detailed interpretation of the law and its impact on similar future cases, thereby contributing to the evolving landscape of family law in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
SHAKEEL SAOOD KHAN,
RIZWANA KHANUM
|
| Judges |
ASAD MUNIR
|
| Lawyers |
Ch. Sameed Ahmad Wains,
Asif Miran
|
| Petitioners |
SHAKEEL SAOOD KHAN
|
| Respondents |
RIZWANA KHANUM and another
|
| Citations |
2012 SLD 390,
2012 PLD 43
|
| Other Citations |
Mst. Shaista v. Sheikh Liaquat Ali Sathi and 2 others PLD 2006 Lah. 158,
Samia Akbar v Muhammad Zubair PLD 1990 Lah 71,
Shahnaz Begum v. Muhammad Shafi and others PLD 2004 Lah 290,
Muhammad Shaban v Judge Family Court and others 2003 YLR 2708,
Muhammad Samiullah v. Muhammad Ilyas and others PLD 1987 Lah 420,
Naila Azmat v. Judge Family Court and others 1999 MLD 3090 rel.
|
| Laws Involved |
Family Courts Act, 1964,
Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
|
| Sections |
5,
Sched,
10,
14,
10(4),
14(2)(a),
199
|