MUHAMMAD FARRUKH IRFAN KHAN, J.---Through this Constitution petition, petitioner assails the validity of judgment and decree dated 28-2-2008 passed by learned District Judge Mandi Bahauddin, whereby, he while accepting the appeal of respondent No,2 against the judgment and decree of learned Judge Family Court decreed her suit for recovery of dowry articles.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that marriage between the parties was solemnized on Watta Satta and sister of the petitioner was married with the brother of respondent No,2; that dowry articles were not given to the petitioner at the time of her marriage; that there is no Injunction of giving dowry articles in Holy Quran; that the learned trial Court while appreciating the evidence has rightly dismissed the suit of respondent No,2 for recovery of dowry articles; that learned Appellate Court has illegally accepted the appeal of respondent No,2 while passing the impugned judgment and decree.
3. Conversely, learned counsel for respondent No,2 submits that it is a custom of our country that parents do give dowry articles to their daughters at the time of marriage irrespective of their financial status; that no marriage of Watta Satta is taken place between the parties; that there is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment of the learned Appellate Court.
4. Arguments heard. Record perused.
5. The marriage between the parties was solemnized which ended in divorce. The petitioner while appearing as D.W.1 in his cross-examination admitted that respondent No,2 is the only daughter of her parent and parents of respondent No,2 prepared dowry articles for her. So far as denial of the petitioner that the said prepared dowry articles were not given to respondent No,2 is not believable.
6. I have also gone through the list of dowry articles and come to the conclusion that the dowry articles mentioned in the said list are of daily use. In our social phenomena such like dowry articles are given to the bride by the parents at the time of marriage irrespective of their financial status.
During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner frankly conceded that though it was settled between the parties that sister of the petitioner would be married with the brother of respondent No,2 yet the said settlement could not be finalized due to some unknown reasons. In this way, it cannot be said that the marriage between the parties was solemnized as Watta Satta.
Learned Appellate Court while passing the impugned judgment has rightly appreciated the evidence available on record and decreed the suit in favour of respondent No,2 for recovery of dowry articles. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to point out any illegality or irregularity in the impugned judgment and decree, which calls for interference by this Court.
7. Resultantly, I find no merits in this petition and the same is hereby dismissed.