Oxford law associates

18/01/2026

27/09/2025

ام ملزم ضمانت كاحق وار مو تو صرف جرم
ك شكين كي بنياديم ضمائت ى انكار نيين
كيا جاسكتا- جب تشتيش مكل مواور تراكل ميس تاخير موردى مو تو ملزم كو ضمائت
O1
دلى جائى كى
2020 PCrLJ Note 15 24

27/09/2025

اكرمشيات ملزمان ك ذاتى قيف سى يا
أن كي نشائدى ا برآمدنه مو تومحض موجووكي كي بنياو ذمه وارين هبرايا
جاسكتا

2020 PcrLJ Note 25 35

27/09/2025

20/06/2021

PROCEDURE IN FAMILY COURT

PROCEEDINGS IN FAMILY COURT SHALL BE GOVERNED BY GENERAL PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY, FAIR PLAY AND JUSTICE.
2017 SCMR 321
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CASE BY THE HUSBAND

HUSBAND CAN FILE CASE FOR RECEIVING THE GIFT ETC IN FAMILY COURT AND NOT IN CIVIL COURT, ON APPLYING COURT FEE.
2014 CLC 87

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2ND MARRIAGE

2nd MARRIAGE WITHOUT IDDAT
2016 CLC Lah 717
2004 YLR FSC 619
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

POWER OF FAMILY COURT

FAMILY COURT HAS POWER TO REVIEW HIS OWN ORDER TO SOME EXTENT.
2016 PLD Lah 73
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GOLD IN DOWRY

PRICE OF GOLD ORNAMENT IN SUIT FOR RECOVERY OF GOLD ORNAMENT WILL BE DETERMINED FROM THE DATE OF INSTITUTION OF THE CASE.
1996 SCMR 1063
2017 SCMR 321
2013 SCMR 1049
PLJ 2013 SC 626
2014 CLC 895
2013 CLC 492
PLD 2012 Lah 165
2015 CLC 105
2012 MLD 1594
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

EVIDENCE IN FAMILY CASES

WHEN THE DIRECT EVIDENCE TO PROVE A FACT WAS AVAILABLE IN THE SHAPE OF ORAL AS WELL AS DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THEN THERE WAS NO NEED TO SEEK EXPERT OPINION WHICH OTHERWISE IS A THIRD PERSON OPINION AND CAN’T UNDO THE DIRECT EVIDENCE OF THE PARTIES.
2015 SCMR 284
PLD 2015 Lah 500
PLD 2010 Lah 422
QANOON E SHAHADAT NOT STRICTO SENSU APPLICABLE IN FAMILY COURT. OBJECT OF THE FAMILY COURT IS TO ADVANCE JUSTICE AND TO AVOID TECHNICALITIES. CONCURRENT FINDING OF THE FACT. CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION DISMISSED.
2016 MLD Lah 668
MERE FACT THAT THE PARTY DID NOT FORMALLY PROVE THE DOCUMENT IS OF NO LEGAL VALUE. PETITION DISMISSED.
2012 MLD 756.
NEW NAME OF THE WITNESSES ARE ALLOWED.
PLD 2103 SC 255
2005 MLD 1776

2009 CLC 269
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NIKAH NAMA

UNDERTAKING GIVEN IN NIKAH NAMA, PART OF DOWER. MATTER OF ADJUCATION BY FAMILY COURT.
PLD 2016 SC 613
PROPERTY MENTIONED IN NIKAH NAMA, TO BE GIVEN TO WIFE.
2016 MLD 925
2010 YLR 2452
2013 YLR 1118
2015 PLD 88
ANY CONDITION, MENTIONED IN NIKAH NAMA BY THE HUSBAND, IN CASE OF PRONOUNCING TALAQ ETC BY HUSBAND, NO LEGAL VALUE.
2008 SCMR 186
PLD 2011 SC 260
2012 CLC 837
GIFTS GIVEN TO THE WIFE, MENTIONED IN COLUMN NO 16, RIGHT OF WIFE, NOT REFUNDABLE.
2010 YLR 349
NIKAH NAMA, PER SE ADMISIBLE IN EVIDENCE, FOR TRANSFER OF PROPERTY IN LIU OF DOWER.
PLD 2000 Lah 236
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CASE OF MAINTENANCE ALLOWNCE

SUIT OF MAINTENANCE ALLOWANCE BY THE MOTHER AGAINST HER SON, MAINTAINABLE.
2012 MLD 148
2013 CLC 452
DIVORCED DAUGHTER CAN FILE SUIT FOR MAINTENANCE AGAINST HER FATHER.
PLD 2012 Lah 154
WIFE NOT ENTITLED FOR MAINTENANCE WHERE THE DEFENDANT WAS THE ONLY SON OF THE PARENTS AND WIFE DEMANDED SEPARATE HOUSE TO LIVE.
PLJ 2010 Lah 271
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOWER

DOWER, BETWEEN SPOUSES CAN BE INCREASED SUBSEQUENTLY.
2017 PLJ 41
2016 SCMR 2170
2016 MLD 1411
SNATCHING OF DOWER AFTER GIVING THE WIFE, MATTER FALLS WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF FAMILY COURT.
PLD 2015 Lah 57
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPEAL/DECREE/EX PARTE DECREE BY FAMILY COURT.

SECTION 5 OF LIMITATION NOT APPLICABLE BEFORE FAMILY COURT. LIMITATION FOR SETTING ASIDE EX PARTE DECREE IS 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF DECREE AND NOT FROM DATE OF KNOWLEDGE.
PLJ 2012 SC AJK 122
NO APPEAL LIES AGAINST DECREE OF DOWER AMOUNT.
2001 SCJ 297
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DOWRY

TIME FOR FILING DOWRY SUIT, THREE YEARS.
2016 MLD Islamabad 313
2016 MLD 693
SOLITARY STATEMENT OF WIFE SUFFICIENT TO PROVE THE CLAIM OF DOWRY.
PLJ 2015 Lah 7
2012 MLD 756
DETERMINATION OF VALUE OF DOWRY, SOLE STATEMENT OF WIFE HELD ENOUGH.
2015 MLD 1069
WIFE ABSOLUTE OWNER OF DOWRY OR BRIDAL GIFT
2011 YLR 1000
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MANGNI

MANGNI HAS NO LEGAL EFFECT, UNDER MUSLIM LAW.
1990 MLD 792
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DIVORCE

DIVORCE ON THE BASES OF KHULA, WOULD BE ONE DIVORCE. SPOUSES CAN OPT REUNION WITHOUT HALALA, EVEN AFTER 10 YEARS AND EVEN AFTER CERTIFICATE BY UNION COUNCIL
2011 CLC 1211
PLD 2011 Lah 458
PLD 2003 Pesh 169
PLD 2013 Sindh 209
PLJ 2010 Kar 97
ORAL DIVORCE HAVE NO IMPORTANCE.
PLD 2006 SC 457
DIVORCE IS NOT NECESSARY TO BE EXECUTED ON STAMP PAPER.
2004 CLC 984
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

DEATH OF THE HUSBAND

HUSBAND DIED BORE COMPLETION OF 90 DAYS OF DIVORCE, DIVORCE NOT BECOME EFFECTIVE, WIFE COMMITTED TO BE HIS WIDOW AND ENTITLED TO INHERIT HIS PROPERTY.
1994 SCMR 1720
PLD 1963 SC 51
2017 CLC 516 Sindh.
PLD 1974 SC 22
1998 SCMR 1812
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

JACTITATION OF MARRIAGE

CASE OF JACTITATION OF MARRIAGE, FILED BY OTHER THAN THE WIFE OR HUSBAND, NOT MAINTAINABLE IN FAMILY COURT.
PLD 2006 Lah 260
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION

TO CHALLENGE THE ORDER ON THE GROUND THAT THE EVIDENCE WAS NOT PROPERLY APPRECIATED, AS FINDING OF FACT RECORDED BY THE COURT OF COMPETENT JURISDICTION COULD NOT BE DISTURBED SOLELY ON THE GROUND THAT ANOTHER VIEW WAS POSSIBLE ON THE SAME EVIDENCE. IN CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION HIGH COURT COULD NOT SIT AS A COURT OF APPEAL.
2016 MLD Lah 801
2016 MLD Lah 693
PLD 2006 SC 457
FACTUAL CONTROVERSY COULD NOT BE RESOLVED IN WRIT.
2016 MLD Lah 693
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

INTERIM ORDER

17 A FCA, 1964, NONCOMPLIANCE OF INTERIM ORDER, COURT MAY STRUCK OFF THE RIGHT OF THE DEFENDANT AND CAN PASS DECREE.
2016 MLD Sindh 742

APPEAL AGAINST THE INTERLOCUTORY ORDER NOT MAINTAINABLE
2014 CLC 11
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

PATERNITY

ACKNOWLEDGE OF PATERNITY. CHILD EVEN IF ILLEGITIMATE BY BIRTH BECOME LEGITIMATE BY FORCE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF PATERNITY.
1988 PLD SC 8
1980 PLD SC 228
1976 PLD SC 767
1973 PLD Baghdad UI Jadeed 48
IF MOTHER NOT MARRIED WITH OTHER PERSON, THE CHILD WHO IS BORN WITHIN A PERIOD OF TWO YEARS WILL BELONG TO THE 1ST HUSBAND.
PLD 2015 SC 327
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

GIFT

LAW OF GIFT DOES NOT REQUIRE A DONOR TO MENTION THE REASON FOR GIFTING PROPERTY T ANY PERSON AND EXCLUDING OTHER.
2016 YLR Lah 116
NO GIFT UNLESS TRANSFER OF POSSESSION TAKE PLACE.
PLD 1974 SC 185

11/06/2021

The remedies available against ex parte decree are:- (2000 SCMR 296)
1- An application under Order 9, Rule 13
2- A review application u/s 114
3- An appeal u/s 96
4- A proceeding to set aside the decree on the ground that it has been obtained by fraud etc. u/s 12
5- An application for re-hearing of the matter on the ground of violation of the principles of natural justice(PLD 1972 Lah. 603 FB)
6- A revision may also lie (1995 CLC 516)
7- In appropriate cases the inherent powers of a court may also be attracted (PLD 2003 SC 625) or a writ maylie (1986 CLC 2515).

06/06/2021

Once a decree passed by the Family Court in a suit for maintenance (for minors) was granted, thereafter, if the granted rate for monthly allowance was insufficient and inadequate, in that case, institution of fresh suit was not necessary rather the Family Court may entertain any such application (under S. 151, C.P.C.) and if necessary make alteration in the rate of maintenance allowance.

2016 S C M R 1821 SC
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Present: Iqbal Hameedur Rahman, Manzoor Ahmad Malik and Ijaz-ul-Ahsan, JJ

Maintenance allowance for minors, enhancement. Powers of family court.

Order for maintenance allowance for minors was passed by Family Court.

Mother of minors sought enhancement in maintenance allowance through filing an application under S. 151, C.P.C. before the Family Court.

Objection of father that enhancement in maintenance allowance could only be sought by filing a separate suit---Validity---

Provisions of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 were not stricto sensu applicable to the proceedings under the Family Courts Act, 1964, as such the Family Court was competent to adopt its own procedure.

Family Court had exclusive jurisdiction relating to maintenance allowance and the matters connected therewith.

Once a decree by the Family Court in a suit for maintenance (for minors) was granted, thereafter, if the granted rate for monthly allowance was insufficient and inadequate, in that case, institution of fresh suit was not necessary rather the Family Court may entertain any such application (under S. 151, C.P.C.) and if necessary make alteration in the rate of maintenance allowance---

Objection was rejected accordingly.

03/06/2021

The section 42 of the Specific Relief Act provides that any person entitled to any legal character or to any right as to any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or interested to deny, his title to such character or right. In the present case, the petitioner seeks decree to the effect that the respondent is no more his lawfully wedded wife and that she be restrained to claim as such after the pronouncement of divorce that has become effective. The suit of the petitioner, therefore, falls within the ambit of section ibid, triable by the court of competent jurisdiction to try the said matters.
2021 YLR 43

30/05/2021

Pleadings-- ----Evidence--Scope---When contents of plaint and evidence do not support each other the evidence beyond pleadings becomes irrelevant and ineffective.
2021 CLC 42