P L D 2000 Lahore 355 ✅ ♦️ Dower, entrienamas in Nikha nama ♦️

P L D 2000 Lahore 355 ✅ ♦️ Dower, entries in Nikha nama ♦️ Before Mrs. Fakhar‑un‑Nisa Khokhar, J MUHAMMAD ASLAM‑‑‑Petitioner versus Mst. SURAYA ‑‑‑ Respondent Writ Petition No. 3547 of 2000, decided on 2nd March, 2000. (a) Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VII of 1961)‑‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S.5‑‑‑West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964), S.23‑‑­Registration of marriage‑‑‑Validity of registered marriage‑‑‑Jurisdiction of Family Court‑‑‑Validity of marriage registered under Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, would not be questioned by Family Court nor any evidence in regard thereto would be admissible before the said Court‑‑‑‑If marriage was questioned on ground of fraud or misrepresentation, remedy would not be available with the Family Court, but with the Court of general jurisdiction‑‑‑Legislature had provided that four copies of Nikahnama should be prepared, one was to be kept by Registrar of Nikah, second one to be sent to concerned Municipal Corporation, Municipal Committee or Union Council as the case may be, third copy was to be supplied to bride and fourth one to the bridegroom, to verify that entries in Nikahnama were according to the terms of marriage settled between the parties. (b) Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961)‑‑‑­ ‑‑‑‑S. 5‑‑‑Marriage under Muslim Law‑‑‑Nature and essentials of ‑‑‑Nikah Registrar‑‑‑Status‑‑‑Interpolation in entries of Nikah Register ‑‑‑Remedy‑‑­ Marriage under Muslim Law, was a civil contract‑‑‑‑Essentials of marriage were that any person who was capable of contracting a marriage, was not suffering from any legal disability; was of sound mind and who understood nature of contract and would enjoy freedom to enter into the contract of marriage ‑‑‑Nikah Registrar under Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, being a public servant within meaning of S.21, P.P.C. discharged public duty‑‑‑If any party was of the view that Nikah Registrar had interpolated in the entries of Nikah Register, such. party could approach the Deputy Commissioner who was the Controlling. Authority and could get the same corrected. Mst. Hanifan v. D.C. and others PLD 1967 Kar. 165 ref. (c) Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961)‑‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 5 & 10‑‑‑West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964), S.5 & Sched.‑‑‑Transaction of dower‑‑‑Completion of‑‑‑Suit for recovery of dower‑‑‑Transaction of dower would become complete on the day of marriage‑‑‑Endorsement of dower against column in Nikahnama was a verification of settlement and arrangement already reached between the parties‑‑‑If woman would make a demand through filing a suit for recovery of dower, person contending that entries in Nikahnama were not correct, was bound to rebut said entries through a strong evidence otherwise Court was bound to give a solemn affirmation to the entries in Nikahnama. Naseer Ahmad Qureshi for Petitioner. ORDER Brief facts of the instant writ petition are that the respondent filed a suit for recovery of Rs.1,00,000 against the petitioner, the dower amount fixed at the time of marriage in the learned Family Court, Bhalwal District, Sargodha. Suit was contested by the defendant/petitioner by way of filing written statement and the following. issues were formulated:‑‑‑ (i) Whether the plaintiff is entitled to a decree for recovery of dower amounting to Rs.1,00,000 per month? OPP. (i‑A) Whether the suit is not maintainable in view of preliminary objection No. l? OPD. (ii) Whether the plaintiff has got no cause of action as well as locus standi to sue? OPD. (iii) Relief. In paragraph 4 of the written statement, the defendant stated that the dower was "Shari" which was Rs.32 and was paid at the time of Nikah. Dower was not fixed as Rs.1,00,000 and was not accepted by the defendant. 2. Parties led their respective evidence. P. W.1 Muhammad Anwar, father and special attorney of the plaintiff stated on oath that dower was Rs.1,.00,000 and this entered in Nikahnama Exh‑P‑2 and it is not paid. Muhammad Aslam defendant appeared as D.W.1 and stated that no dower was fixed at the time of marriage, he has thumb‑marked the Nikahnama. Entries of the Nikahnama were not filled in his presence,. Dower was Rs.34/35. A form of Nikahnama was obtained by him later on and no such consideration of Rs.I,00,000 was fixed by him. In his cross‑examination, he stated that he thumb‑marked the Nikhnama at the house of Advocate, but Nikahnama was obtained by him 2/3 months afterwards. He produced Exh.D‑1, Nikahnama of one Mst. Zahida Perveen daughter of Ghulam Mustafa where the dower is Rs.500 and Exh.D‑2 Nikahnama of Mst. Robina Kosar daughter of Ghulam Mustafa, where dower is Rs.1,000 and closed the evidence. Learned Judge Family Court while giving issue wise finding decided Issue No. l against the plaintiff and dismissed the suit with costs, vide judgment and decree dated 25‑2‑1998. On appeal vide judgment and decree dated 12‑4‑1999 the learned Appellate Court reversed the finding of learned Judge Family Court and allowed the appeal and decreed the suit filed by the plaintiff. 3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and carefully perused the record. Section 3 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 prescribed that provision of this Ordinance shall have effect notwithstanding any law, custom or usage the registration of Muslim marriages shall take place only in accordance with those provisions. Section 5 of the Ordinance provides that every marriage solemnized under the Muslim Law shall be registered in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance and for this purpose Union Council is authorised to grant licence to one or more persons to be Nikah Registrar. 4. Under section 5 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, if marriage is not soleminzed by the Nikah Registrar but the parties to marriage are required by law to report the marriage for the purposes of registration by the person officiating at the time of marriage.. Under section 5(4) contravention of this provision is punishable with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months or fine of Rs.1,000 or with both. But non‑registration in itself would not invalidate the marriage. 5. As far as the entries of Nikahnama are concerned there are columns in the Nikahnama which clearly indicate the events of marriage taking place between the marital spouses, their names, parentage, the authorized Wakeel of bride, authorized Wakeel of bridegroom, the witnesses, nature of dower and other stipulations. Intention of Legislature is that these columns clearly indicate the referred arrangement, the settlement of dower and other events which have actually happened between parties and in case of any controversy the document of Nikahnama alongwith evidence of the person who has soleminzed such Nikah and evidence of recital in the ordinary case shall be sufficient to prove the factum of alienation of property or the consideration of dower movable or immovable unless the party strongly rebuts the same beyond doubt. If it fails to rebut the same Family Court is bound to give solemn affirmation to the entries in the Nikahnama. 6. Section 23 of the Family Courts Act gives effect to the registration of marriage wherein it has provided that validity of marriage registered under this section shall not be questioned by any Family Court nor shall any evidence in regard thereto be admissible before such Court and whenever marriage is questioned through fraud or mis‑representation for example a wife challenges the marriage on the ground that she has not given free consent to the marriage or the marriage is Fasid or it is opposed to Muslim Laws or is the outcome of fraud, the remedy is not available in the Family Court, it is otherwise available in the Court of general jurisdiction, therefore, '4 the Legislature has provided that four copies of Nikahnama be prepared, one is kept by the Registrar of Nikah, second one is sent to the concerned Municipal Corporation, Municipal Committee or Union Council as the case may be and third copy is supplied to the bride and the fourth is. supplied to the bridegroom, to verify that the entries in the Nikahnama are according to the terms of marriage settled between the parties. 7. A marriage under Muslim Law is essentially a civil contract, the essentials of marriage are that any person who is capable‑ of contracting a marriage, who is not suffering from any legal disability, who is of sound mind and understands the nature of contract shall enjoy the freedom to enter into the contract. The transaction of dower becomes complete on the day of the marriage. The endorsement of dower against the columns in the Nikahnama is a verification of settlement and arrangement already reached between the parties. 8. Even the Nikah Registrar. within the Family Laws Ordinance is a public servant within the meaning of section 21, P.P.C. and he is discharging the public duty. 9. If any party comes to' the conclusion that the Nikah Registrar has interpolated in the entries of the Nikah registered, he may go to the Deputy Commissioner as controlling authority and get the same corrected "Mst. Hanifan v. D.C. and others" (PLD 1967 Karachi 165). 10. But whenever a woman makes a demand through filing a suit for recovery of dower, the person who contends that the entries in Nikahnama are not correct is bound to rebut these entries through a strong evidence otherwise the Courts are bound to give a solemn affirmation to the entries in the Nikahnama. . 11. Exh.P‑2 Nikahnama relates to the sister of P.W.1, who has already answered that sisters were given in marriage by father so, this document in order to prove that quantum of dower is usually fixed Rs.34/35 is not relevant to the present case, therefore, the learned Appellate Court has rightly set aside the judgment and decree passed by the learned Judge Family Court, the judgment of the learned Appellate Court is unexceptionable, the writ petition is dismissed in limine. Petition dismissed.