CH. MUHAMMAD TARIQ,. J. --- The instant application has been filed for restoration of the main writ for non-prosecution on 27.4.2010. The application is supported by an affidavit of the learned counsel. For the reasons stated therein, this CM is allowed and the main petition, is restored to its original number. CM stands disposed of.
MAIN CASE 2. Brief facts of the case are that about 51/2 years ago, the petitioner was married with.
Respondent No. 1. Out of this wedlock, no child was born. After some time, respondent No. 1 filed a suit for the recovery of maintenance which was decreed on 13.4.2009 by Mr. Saqib Farooq Awan, learned Family Judge who fixed Rs. 2000/- per month as maintenance of respondent No. 1 with effect from 3.7.2006 on account of past maintenance and also future maintenance at the same rate. The petitioner filed an appeal which was -dismissed by Syed 'Hussain, learned District Judge, Sargodha on 17.06.2009. Hence this writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has emphasized more on a sole point that since the petitioner is Christian by religion so Family Courts have no jurisdiction to pass an order' against the petitioner, therefore, this writ petition be allowed, impugned judgment and decree dated 17.6.20'09 passed by learned. District Judge, Sargodha as well as judgment and decree dated 13.4.2009 passed by the, learned Judge, Family Court be set aside and the suit for the recovery of maintenance of the respondent No. 1 be dismissed . In support of his contentions, the learned counsel has referred the law laid down in PLD 1978 Karachi 336.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. This Court has examined the written statement filed by the petitioner but the question of jurisdiction has never been raised by the petitioner. Similarly, the petitioner has not raised any such ground before the Appellate Court while filing an appeal and even the petitioner has failed to incorporate this ground in the instant petition. The petitioner cannot go beyond his pleadings. All the matters shall be decided within four corners of the pleadings. The question of jurisdiction could be raised at the earliest. Such an objection is not tenable. The law laid down in "PLD 1978 Karachi 336" referred by the petitioner's counsel in favour of his' contentions is not applicable because this law is in respect of divorce amongst the Christians and has no nexus with the present case. Even otherwise, the provisions of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 would apply in the instant case.
The relevant provisions of the ibid Act are given as under:- "5. Section 3(3) of Divorce Act, 1869, has defined the Court of Civil Judge, which reads as under:- "Section 3(2): "Court of Civil Judge" means in the case of any petition under this Act, the Court of the Civil Judge within the local limits of whose ordinary jurisdiction the husband ,and wife resided or last resided together."
'6. From the above provisions of law, it clearly means that the petition can be filed in the Court of Civil Judge, where the spouses resided or had been residing together.
7. Schedule under Section 5 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 provided the following suits triable by the Judge, Family Court:---
(1) Dissolution of marriage including Khula.
(2) Dower.
(3) Maintenance.
(4) Restitution of conjugal rights..
'(5) Custody of children.
(6) Guardianship.
(7) Jactitation of marriage.
(8) Dower.
(9) Personal property and belongings of a wife.
8. Rule 6 of the Family Courts Rules, 1965, deals with the jurisdiction of the Court to try the suit under the Act, which is as under:- "Rule-6.---The Court which shall have jurisdiction to try a suit will be that within the local limits of which:---
(a) the cause of action wholly or in part has arisen, or
(b) where the parties resided together; Provided that in suits for dissolution of marriage or dower, the Court within the local limits of which the wife ordinarily resides shall also have jurisdiction."
9. Section 5 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, deals with the jurisdiction of the Court, which is reproduced as under for ready reference:- -- "Section 5.---Subject to the provisions of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, and the Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961, the Family Courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction to entertain, hear and adjudicate upon matters specified in the Schedule."
10. In the circumstances, Family Court has extensive jurisdiction to entertain a matter pertaining to recovery of maintenance. Resultantly, this writ petition fails. Order accordingly. . revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.