' HAFIZ TARIQ NASIM, J.---The petitioner filed a suit for the recovery of dowry in the Court of Judge Family Court, Khushab the same was dismissed and the petitioner filed appeal in the Court of learned District Judge, Khushab, the same was also dismissed on 11-8-2007. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the learned Courts below did not adhere to the most important aspects of the matter with particularly of competency of the Union Council concerned, did not advert to the law referred, resulting into serious miscarriage of justice.
2. The learned counsel for respondent No,1, supports the impugned judgments and contends that the petitioner has not come to the Court with clean hands and is not entitled for nay relief, further submits that the petitioner entered into a third marriage posing herself in the Nikah Nama and being third marriage she did not bring any dowry articles etc. Whereas she is trying to blackmail the present respondent No,l.##TE#
3. Arguments heard; record perused.
4. After hearing both the learned counsel, the impugned judgments have been perused with the help of both the learned counsel, it shall be advantageous to re-produce para. 4 of the judgment passed by the learned District Judge, Khushab, dated 11-8-2007 which is reproduced as under:-- "I have gone through Exh.C1 thoroughly. Its opening lines refer to a judgment, dated 17-3-2007 which according to Union Nazim contain a unanimous verdict of Musalheen. A verdict signed by Hakeem Malik Rub Nawaz is also on record but it is distinct and separate from Exh.C1. Exh.C1 has been signed and thumb marked by Malik Muhammad Nawaz, Subedar Retired Mehr Ahmad, Malik Muhammad Mumtaz, Haji Atta Muhammad and Sher Muhammad. According to this verdict the appellant's two earlier marriages failed and that she married Muhammad Sarfraz, the present respondent from whom she got Talaq through Court. The verdict further reveals that at the time of 3rd marriage no dowry was given by her parents to the appellant. The judgment also discloses that the parties were gathered by the Musalheen. The contention of the learned counsel that the parties were not heard is not tenable in view of Article 129 clause (e) of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order. Thus I find no illegality in the judgment and decree under appeal. Resultantly, this appeal fails and the same is dismissed with no order as to costs."
5. Admittedly the petitioner did not disclose in her Nikah Nama that it was her third marriage and even today the learned counsel for the petitioner did, not disclose this material fact, which is sufficient for disentitlement of the petitioner for a discretionary relief in the form of writ.##TE# ' Accordingly the writ petition is dismissed.