2011 YLR 3034 [Lahore]ڪي خاندان پردي جي ڪري پنهنجي ڌيۡ يا ڀيڻ کي گهر ويهاريو ويٺا هوندا هن ۽ خلا چاهيندي به خلا نه وٺندا هن انهن لا۽ اهو آ ته فيملي ڪيس خلا جو يا خرچ زال يان ٻارن جو اٽارني جي ٿرو ٿي سگهي ٿو زال کي ڪورٽ م وڃڻ جي ضرورت ناهي. اٽارني پيء ماءۡ ڀاءۡ يا ڪوبه مائٽ ٿي سگهي ٿو.

ڪي خاندان پردي جي ڪري پنهنجي ڌيۡ يا ڀيڻ کي گهر ويهاريو ويٺا هوندا هن ۽ خلا چاهيندي به خلا نه وٺندا هن انهن لا۽ اهو آ ته فيملي ڪيس خلا جو يا خرچ زال يان ٻارن جو اٽارني جي ٿرو ٿي سگهي ٿو زال کي ڪورٽ م وڃڻ جي ضرورت ناهي. اٽارني پيء ماءۡ ڀاءۡ يا ڪوبه مائٽ ٿي سگهي ٿو.

Pre trial in family suit can be through attorney plaintiff in person not required (Mujjan Ali Panhwar )

(a)    West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---

----S. 5, Sched., Ss.10(3) & 18---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Suit for dissolution of marriage---Defendant's application for summoning of plaintiff in person---Defendant's plea was that plaintiff had not filed suit with her free consent; that she was not a pardahnashin lady and that her personal attendance in court was essential for reconciliation and to resolve question of authenticity of her signatures on plaint---Dismissal of such application by Family Court---Validity---Plaintiff living abroad had been pursuing suit through her attorney/father---Plaintiff had appeared before Family Court and made statement after putting her signatures on its order-sheet that she had to go to America and could not live with the defendant---Plaintiff was identified before Family Court by her counsel---Order of Additional Sessions Judge disposing of habeas corpus petition on plaintiffs statement was still holding field for not having been challenged any further by the defendant---Plaintiff was duly represented by her attorney, thus, there was no need of her personal appearance before Family Court---Plaintiff having appeared before Family Court, once or twice, would not be disentitled her to avail legal right provided under S. 18 of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 for all times to come---Personal appearance of plaintiff in conciliation proceedings was not mandatory---Question as to whether plaintiff was a pardahnashin lady or not, being factual one could not be decided in constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Defendant could raise such question before Family Court during trial or at time of final decision of case---Impugned interim order was neither illegal nor mala fide or without jurisdiction, thus, could not be challenged in constitutional jurisdiction---High Court dismissed constitutional petition in circumstances.

Muhammad Javed Iqbal v. Mst. Tahira Naheed and others 2002 CLC 1396 and Shahida Perveen and another v. Sher Afzal and 2 others 2006 MLD 1752 ref.

Khalid Mehmood Syed v. Razi Abbas Bokhari, Judge, Family Court, Lahore PLD 1979 Lah. 217; Mst. Saeeda v. Lal Badshah 1981 SCMR 395 and Saad Amanullah Khan v. Ayesha Tahir Shafique and another 1999 CLC 1544 rel.

(b) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---

----S. 10(3) & 18---Pre-trial conciliation proceedings---Personal appearance of wife in such proceedings---Scope---Provision of S.10(3) of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 for being directory neither required personal appearance of wife nor such appearance was mandatory---Court under S. 18 of the Act could dispense with legal requirement of personal appearance of Pardahnashin lady and allow her to be represented in such proceedings through her authorized agent---Wife having appeared before Family Court, once or twice, would not be disentitled to avail legal right provided under S. 18 of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 for all times to come---Principles.

Khalid Menunood Syed v. Razi Abbas Bokhari, Judge, Family Court, Lahore PLD 1979 Lah. 217 and Mst. Saeeda v. Lal Badshah 1981 SCMR 395 rel.

(c) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---

----Ss. 5 & 14---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199--- Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Interim order of Family Court---Such order, if neither illegal nor mala fide nor without jurisdiction, could not be challenged in such jurisdiction.

Saad Amanullah Khan v. Ayesha Tahir Shafique and another 1999 CLC 1544 rel.

2011 YLR 3034
[Lahore]
Before Malik Shahzad Ahmed Khan, J

AWAIS KHALID---Petitioner
Versus
JUDGE FAMILY COURT and others---Respondents