Abu Qatadah

Abu Qatadah Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from Abu Qatadah, Lawyer & Law Firm, Abu Qatadah Law Chamber district courts Lodhran, Lodhran.

20/10/2019

*Judgments on Maintenance by Grandfather*

*PLD 2012 Lahore 445*
*PLD 2012 Lahore 148*
*PLD 2011 Lahore 610*
*PLD 2010 Lahore 119*
*2005 SCMR 1293*
*2004 YLR 616*
If some more effort is made few other judgments may also be found.

*2016 PLD 622 LAHORE*
Ss. 13 & 5, Sched---Maintenance allowance---Grand father, liability of---ex*****on petition---Procedure---ex*****on of a decree against a person who was not party to the suit---Scope---Minors filed suit for maintenance allowance against their father which was decree d---Judgment debtor (father) was sent to civil prison till the satisfaction of decree and property belonging to the grandfather was ordered to be attached---Contention of grandfather was that he was not party to the suit and decree could not be executed against him---Validity---Liability of grandfather to maintain his grandchildren would start when father was poor and infirm and mother was also not in a position to provide maintenance to her children---Such liability of grandfather was dependent upon the fact that he was in easy circumstances---If father and mother were alive then grandfather could not be held responsible for maintenance of his grandchildren unless it was first determined that he was in easy circumstances---family Court was bound to first adjudicate and determine such fact which could not be done unless he was a party to the suit having fair opportunity to explain his status and position---No decree could be executed against a person who was not a party to the proceedings---Executing court could not go beyond the decree ---decree passed by the family Court would remain in field to the extent of actual judgment-debtor even after suffering civil prison unless it was satisfied---Process of ex*****on of decree could not shift towards the grandfather only on account of mere fact that judgment-debtor had failed to discharge his liability under the decree --family Court could adopt the procedure provided in Civil Procedure Code, 1908 for ex*****on of its decree ---Judgment-debtor could be sent to civil prison for one year--Impugned order for attachment of property of grandfather was un-warranted by law which was declared illegal and unlawful---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

20/10/2019

PROCEDURE FOR RE-EXAMINATION OF AN INJURED PERSON/ COMPLAINANT BY ORDERS OF ILAQA MAGISTRATE====
i) Application for the purposes of reexamination by DSMB or examination through Board against the decision of the DSMB shall be filed before the Magistrate by the aggrieved party;

ii) After receiving the application the Magistrate will issue notice to the injured/complainant (as the case
may be) and the Investigating Officer for their appearance;

iii) The Magistrate shall not ordinarily adjourn the matter
for more than one day;

iv) The Magistrate shall pass the order after securing the attendance of the injured/complainant and the Investigating Officer. If after service the injured or the complainant do not appear he may proceed in their
absence;

v) If the Magistrate passes an order for reexamination through DSMB or the appellate board, he will provide
three days’ time to the applicant
for depositing the relevant fee for this purpose as notified by Government of Punjab, Health Department and he shall further clarify in the order that if the fee is not deposited within stipulated period, the order shall be deemed to have been recalled;

vi) The Magistrate through the Investigating Officer shall get information about future dates when DSMB or the appellate Board is to assemble and shall direct the
injured/IO or any other concerned to appear before the DSMN/Board on the said date. (According to the prevailing practice the DSMB assembles on first and last Wednesday of every month

vii) Copy of the order for reexamination through DSMB or
the Board be sent to the DSMB and the Board as the case may be ;

viii) Copy of the order be also sent to
DPO and S.P (Investigation) concerned for compliance

DISTRICT STANDING MEDICAL BOARD/ APPELLATE BOARD

i) After receiving order of the Magistrate for reexamination of the injured, DSMB or the Board shall examine the injured on the date so fixed by the Magistrate;

ii) If for any justifiable reason beyond the control of DSMB/Board the injured could not be examined on
the date fixed, DSMB or the Board shall inform all concerned about the next date to be fixed and intimation shall be communicated to the Magistrate as well as DPO well in time;

iii) If on the date fixed, without any justifiable explanation, the injured does not appear despite his
service, the DSMB/Board may proceed against him and may close the proceedings;

iv) If any justifiable reason is put-forth by the injured the one more opportunity may be provided to him;

v) If service on the injured is not effected by the I.O/SHO then DSMB/Board shall bring this aspect to the notice of the Magistrate/DPO who shall inquire into the matter, fix responsibility and proceed against the delinquent on departmental side, as well as if the act is covered under any cognizable offence then may direct for registration of criminal case and report in this respect by the DPO shall be sent to the DSMN/Board/Magistrate concerned;

vi) If the relevant doctor who had conducted first examination of the injured does not appear before
the DSMB/Board along with record without any justification then his matter shall be referred to the
Secretary Health for inquiry and if found negligent he will be proceeded against under the relevant
laws;

vii) If proceedings before the DSMB/Board are completed they shall inform the Ilaqa Magistrate
and DPO in writing and copy of the report be issued to the Investigation Officer, attested copy whereof shall also be sent to the Ilaqa Magistrate
concerned.

POLICE

i) When an order for reexamination of the injured through DSMB/Board is received in the office of DPO, he shall immediately direct the concerned officials for its compliance;

ii) The DPO shall depute one focal person for keeping the computerized record about the orders received for reexamination of the injured through DSMB or the Board;

iii) The focal person shall ensure compliance of the orders and complete record in this respect shall be maintained and report of service shall be conveyed to the Magistrate/DSMB/Board before or on the
date fixed for reexamination;

iv) The DPO shall ensure that the orders of the Magistrate shall not only be communicated to the
injured, rather the same shall also be complied with by presence of the injured before the Board, as well as production of the record of police;

v) In case the injured is not served by the SHO/IO, the SHO/IO, as the case may be, shall convey the report
to the DPO, who shall verify the genuineness of the reasons advanced therein and if not satisfied with it he shall adopt legal measures against the delinquent officials and shall further adopt legal measures to ensure service on the ijured.........
2018 LHC 1684

20/10/2019

Catina of judgements on Benami Transaction.

1991 SCMR 703, 2012 SCMR 508, 2011 PLD 1144 SC,
2002 SCMR 1866, 1997 SCMR 1861, 1995 PLD 457,
1995 SCMR 1276, 1994 SCMR 2015, 1994 SCMR 1555
1992 SCMR 743

20/10/2019

Whether application u/o 39 rule 1& 2 can be filled in family suit ? And if not applicable then what kind of application for interim relief ???
Yes read P L D 2018 Lahore 735

19/10/2019

Section 12 Specific Relief Act, 1877

اگر کوئی شخص ایک دعویٰ تعمیل مختص کے ذریعے دوسرے فریق کی طرف سے معاہدہ کی پاسداری کی استدعا کرتا ہے تو اس پر لازم ہے کہ دعویٰ کی ابتدائی سماعت میں ہی بقیہ زر ثمن عدالت میں جمع کروانے کی درخواست دے۔ اگر وہ ایسا نہیں کرتا اور بقیہ زرثمن ابتدائی سماعت میں جمع نہیں کرواتا تو اس کا دعویٰ خارج ہو جائے گا۔ اور اگر دعویٰ دوسرے فریق نے دائر کیا ہو تو اس کا دعویٰ ڈگری کر دیا جائے گا۔
[2017 SCMR 2022]

19/10/2019

PLD 2019 LAHORE 285
S. 7---Rules under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, R.3(b)---Notification/S.R.O. No.1086(K)/61, dated 09.11.1961---Divorce certificate, issuance of---Territorial jurisdiction of Chairman, Reconciliation Committee---Scope---Wife not residing in Pakistan at the time of pronouncement of 'talaq'---Under R.3(b) of the Rules under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 ('the Rules') the basic factor which determined the jurisdiction of the Union Council and/or the Chairman for entertaining and proceeding on a notice of divorce (talaq) under subsection (1) of S.7 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 (`the Ordinance') was the place where the wife was residing at the time of pronouncement of divorce (talaq)---Union Council and/or the Chairman, which would have jurisdiction in the matter would be the Union Council and/or the Chairman within whose territorial jurisdiction the wife was residing at the time of pronouncement of divorce (talaq)---At the time the husband, in the present case, was alleged to have pronounced divorce (talaq) upon the wife, both of them were permanently residing in a foreign country (United States of America), however, the husband was stationed in another foreign country (Germany) due to his job---In such circumstances the Chairman, Reconciliation Committee (based in Pakistan) did not have jurisdiction in the matter and erred in issuing the impugned Divorce Certificate---Since the husband and the wife were nationals of Pakistan and a foreign country (USA) and were permanently residing in said foreign country at the relevant time, therefore, the husband should have approached the authorized officer of the concerned Pakistan mission in the foreign country under S.7 of the Ordinance---Divorce certificate issued by the Chairman, Reconciliation Committee (based in Pakistan) was held to be of no legal effect and was accordingly set-aside---Constitutional petition was allowed in circumstances.

18/10/2019

2019 SCMR 1726
Judgment of trial court shoud be in accordence with O. XX Rule 5 C.P.C and judgment delivered by the first court of appeal and final court of facts would not be judgment if it could not conform to the requirements of O. xLI Rule 31 C.P.C

17/10/2019

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 may lie
(1986 CLC 2515)

Address

Abu Qatadah Law Chamber District Courts Lodhran
Lodhran
0608

Telephone

03006768116

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when Abu Qatadah posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Shortcuts

Share

Category