NON APPEARANCE IN PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING
Under section 5, 10 and 18 of Family court Act 1964.. suit for dissolution of marriage by wife… failure of wife to appear before the family court in pre-trial proceeding— effect—wife failed to appear before the family court in pre-trial proceedings and her suit was dismissed— validity—plaintiff wife was a Canadian citizen and she did not reside in Pakistan— wife had filed suit through her attorney who was her maternal uncle— appearance before the family court through agent was permissible and if plaintiff did not appear before the family court then no adverse inference could be drawn against her— even if plaintiff did not appear in spite of direction by the family court for the participation in reconciliation proceedings her suit could not be dismissed for non-prosecution—family court could presume from such conduct of wife that she was not interested in reconciliation proceedings— if family court was of the view that wife wish with regard to reconciliation proceedings should be found out by asking her personally then it could have proceeded to ascertain such fact through video link—family court had misdirected itself while dismissing the suit fo the wife in default on account of her failure to appear in the pre-trial proceedings— Impugned order being illegal and against natural justice was set aside—Matter was remanded to the family court with direction to adopt proper procedure of law and decide the same on merits within specified period.. constitutional petition was disposed of in circumstances.
2017 CLC 1718 Sindh
Family court recording evidence through video link
Section 5 schedule, section 11(1-A) of family court act, article 164 of Qanoon-e-Shahdat Order 1984, Article 199 of Constitution of Pakistan petition.. suit for dissolution of Marriage—Recording of statement through video link— Evidence recorded though modern device— Scope—wife filed application for recording her statement through video link which was accepted by the family court—Validity – Family court could regulate its own procedure— violation of undertaking by the party could not deprive court of its jurisdiction— Family court could adopt its own procedure and was not bound by the rigors of civil procedure code 1908— family court could proceed on the premise that every procedure was permissible unless prohibited— evidence received though modern devices was admissible under article 164 of Qanoon-e-Shahadat 1984, however qanoon-e-Shahadat was not strictly applicable to family court but family court was not barred from receiving such evidence under any provision of law — Petitioner for invoking constitutional jurisdiction of High court was bound to show that court below bad exercised jurisdiction not vested in it by law or there was jurisdictional defect in the order impugned or order was illegal or perverse – NO jurisdictional defect has ben pointed out in the impugned order passed byt eh family court – constitutional petitioner was dismissed in the circumstances.
2017 PLD Lahore 698
Sale agreement witnesses
Article 17 and 79 of qanoon-e-Shahadat 1984, agreement to sell ;;; proof of ….. Requirement … agreement to sell required compulsory attestation of two witnesses and such documents should not be used as evidence until two attesting witnesses were called for the purpose of proving its execution.
2017 PLD Lahore 727
Mere presentation of an affidavit is not valid piece of evidence until and unless it is tendered in evidence by the deponent and cross-examined by the other side
2017 CLC Lahore 1533