' IQBAL HAMEEDUR RAHMAN, J.--- Brief facts leading to this writ petition are that the petitioner was married with respondent No,2 Mst. Asma Iqbal on 6-3-2002 and at the time of marriage the dower was mentioned in the Nikahnama as Rs,500 and also vide registered deed No,2066 dated 6-3-2002 father of the petitioner Haji Muhammad Yousaf had given the property measuring 1 Marla 24 yards to respondent No,2 as dower. Thereafter the relations between the spouses became strained. On 29-6-2004 respondent No,2 filed a suit for dissolution of marriage in the Court of the learned Judge Family Court, Multan. The petitioner submitted written statement, wherein it was stated that as respondent No,2 had sought dissolution of marriage on the ground of Khula, she was bound to return the property measuring 1 Marla 24 yards which she received through registered deed No,2066 dated 6-3-2002. The learned Judge Family Court, Multan, vide judgment dated 9-1,2-2004 and in terms of section 10(4) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 decreed the suit for dissolution of marriage filed by respondent No,2 with the condition that she would return the property measuring 1 Marla 24 yards to the petitioner. Against the said order and decree, respondent No,2 filed an appeal, which was accepted by the learned Additional District Judge, Multan, vide his judgment dated 5-3-2005 and the decree for dissolution of marriage was upheld and the condition as imposed by the learned Judge Family Court, Multan, being declared to be perverse, fanciful, arbitrary and without legal effect, was struck off. Against the said judgment, the petitioner has filed this writ petition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the learned appellate Court wrongly assumed that only the Haqmehr mentioned in the Nikahnama can be ordered to be returned whereas there is nowhere mentioned in section 10 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 that only the Haqmehr received by the wife can be ordered to be returned which is mentioned in the Nikahnama rather the words used in the said proviso that if reconciliation fails, the Family Court shall pass a decree for dissolution of marriage forthwith and also restore the husband the Haqmehr received by the wife in consideration of marriage at the time of marriage, therefore, the impugned judgment dated 5-3-2005 is the result of misconception of law and the same is liable to be set aside and that under section 14, of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, no appeal is provided against the order passed under section 10(4) of the said Act and, therefore, the appeal filed by the respondent Mst. Asma Iqbal before the learned Additional District Judge, Multan, was not maintainable.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No,2 has supported the impugned judgment dated 5-3-2005 and contended that the judgment dated 9-12-2004 passed by the learned Judge Family Court, Multan, to the extent of condition for restoration of Zar-e-Khula is passed against the law and facts and record available with the learned trial Court; that the learned trial Court could not impose the impugned condition after decreeing the suit for dissolution of marriage as according to the available record with the learned trial Court in the shape of Nikahnama only Rs,500 is mentioned as Haq-ul-Mehr, therefore, the learned trial Court could pass the decree, if deems fit to the extent of Haqulmehr which is given in the Nikahnama not otherwise and that respondent No:.2 also took plea in the suit for dissolution of marriage that due to ill behaviour of the petitioner, she had developed hatred against the petitioner and cannot live within the limits ordained by Allah Almighty and the Court has the powers to refuse the return of the dowered property/amount to husband or to release him from payment of dower where due to his cruelty she was compelled to resort to Khula and in this respect reliance is placed upon Karim Ullah v.
Shabana and 2 others PLD 2003 Pesh. 146, and Abid Hussain v. Additional District Judge, Alipur, District Muzaffargarh and another 2006 SCMR 100.
4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the judgment of the learned Judge Family Court and the impugned judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Multan, as well as the record.
5. From the perusal of the Registered Deed No,2066 dated 6-3-2002, which has been executed by father of the petitioner Haji Muhammad Yousaf and wherein it was specifically mentioned that:- {{URDU TEXT}} ' It appears that--the property measuring 1 Marla 24 yards- was given to respondent No,2 as dower in consideration of Haqulmehr and the said offer was accepted by -respondent No,2. Keeping in view the same, the learned Judge Family Court, Multan, has rightly decreed the suit for dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula subject to restoration of dower one Marla and 24 yards land.
Moreover, in para 5 of the appeal filed by respondent No,2 before the learned District Judge, Multan, respondent No,2 also admitted this fact as under: {{URDU TEXT}} ' Further the execution of the Registered Deed is of-the same date i,e, 6-3-2002 as that of the Nikah.
The above facts establish that the said land measuring 1 Marla 24 yards was given to respondent No,2 on account of dower. Therefore, the learned appellate Court while deciding the appeal had failed to take into- consideration the above perspective and has wrongly come to the conclusion that the said land cannot be considered as Haqul Mehr since the same was not mentioned in column No, 13 of the Nikahnama. As such the said finding cannot sustain.
6. In view of the above circumstances, this writ petition is accepted and the impugned judgment passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Multan, dated 5-3-2005 is set aside, resultantly, the order dated 9-12-2004 passed by the learned Judge Family Court, Multan, is restored.