' MUHAMMAD REAZ AKHTAR CHAUDHRY, J.---Through this petition for leave to appeal, the petitioner has sought impeachment of the judgment of the Shariat Court, dated 30-5-2006.
2. The precise facts giving rise to the instant petition are that the non-petitioner brought a suit for recovery of dower. According to the non-petitioner, she was married with the present petitioner. At the time of Nikah ceremony, the amount of dower was fixed as Rs,200,000 (two lac) ten tolas gold ornaments and one plot measuring 10 Marlas. The present petitioner/defendant has divorced her but not paid the amount of dower. This suit was contested by the petitioner. After completion of trial a decree was passed in favour of the non-petitioner.
3. Feeling aggrieved from the said judgment and decree, the petitioner filed an appeal in the Shariat Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir which was dismissed by the said Court. Instant petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the aforesaid judgment of the Shariat Court.
4. Ch. Khalid Rashid, the learned counsel for the petitioner, raised the sole point that both the lower Courts have failed to consider provisions of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir State Muslim Dower Act, 1977 Bikarami, (hereinafter to be referred as the Act 1977). He referred section 2 of the Act and submitted that it clearly contains "that where the amount of dower stipulated for in any contract of dower by a Muhammadan is excessive with reference to means of the husband, the entire sum provided in the contract shall not be awarded in any suit or decree in favour of the plaintiff." He submitted that although the amount of dower was fixed as stated in the plaint but the petitioner had no means to pay the said amount of dower and section 2 of the Act 1977 is clear on the point. It was further submitted by the learned counsel that interpretation of section 2 is required in this case. Therefore, leave may be granted.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the documents appended with the petition.
6. The point raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is pertaining to interpretation of section 2 of the Act, which is as under:-- ' "Where the amount of dower stipulated for any contract of dower by a Muhammadan is excessive with reference to means of the husband, the entire sum provided in the contract shall not be awarded in any suit by decree in favour of the plaintiff, or by allowing it by way set off, lien or otherwise to the defendant; but the amount of the dower to be allowed by the Courts shall be reasonable with reference to the means of the husband and the status of the wife. This rule shall be applicable whether the suit to enforce the contract be brought in the husband's life-time or after his death".
' The aforesaid provisions that the Court while granting decree, has to consider the means of husband whether he is able to pay such amount of dower or not. The interpretation of the aforesaid provisions is required in this case. Therefore, the leave is granted. The petitioner is directed to deposit security of Rs,1000 under rules, failing which leave granting order shall be deemed to be rescinded. The registry office is directed to complete the file and place the same before the learned Chief Justice for proper orders.