' SYED AKHLAQ AHMAD, J.---Through this writ Tasaduq Hussain/ petitioner/defendant has prayed for setting aside the judgment and decree, dated 31-1-2009 passed by the learned Judge Family- Court Burewala District Vehari whereby suit for recovery of dowry filed by Shehla Gul/respondent No,3/plaintiff was decreed in her favour and against him on merit and judgment and decree dated 26-3-2009 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Burewala District Vehari whereby he dismissed the appeal filed by Tasaduq Hussain/ petitioner/ defendant on special oath of Sharnitn ' Ahmad Khan/father of Shehla Gull respondent No,3/plaintiff.
2. Contents of the petition show that respondent No,3/plaintiff filed suit for dissolution of marriage and recovery of dowry in the same suit before the Judge Family Court Burewala District Vehari.
After service, petitioner/defendant appeared before him and submitted his written statement whereafter suit for dissolution of marriage of Shehla Gull/respondent No,3/plaintiff was decreed in her favour and against Tasaduq Hussain/ petitioner/ defendant. Issues were then framed in the suit for recovery of dowry of respondent No,3/plaintiff and the case was fixed for evidence. Both the parties led their evidence and after hearing arguments of both sides, learned Judge Family Court vide his order dated 31-1-2009 decreed on merits the suit for recovery of dowry of respondent No, 3/plaintiff in her favour as per list Exh.P-1 or in the alternate amount to the tune of Rs.2,50,000 as its price.
3. Aggrieved with this decision, Tasaduq Hussain/petitioner defendant filed an appeal before the learned Additional District Judge Tehsil Burewala District Vehari. On 26-3-2009, the case was fixed for arguments when Tasaduq Hussain/ petitioner/defendant along with his counsel, of their own, got recorded statement before the court that if Shamim Ahmad Khan/ father of Shehla Gull/respondent No,3/ plaintiff makes statement before the court on oath of Holy Quran about truthfulness of the suit of respondent No,3/ plaintiff appeal filed by him be treated as having been withdrawn. In case he fails to take the stated oath the appeal be treated as having been accepted.
' Shamim Ahmad Khan/father of respondent No,3/plaintiff and his counsel accepted the said offer and took the required oath. In view of above, learned Additional District Judge Burewala vide his order dated 26-3-2009 dismissed the appeal of the petitioner/defendant.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/defendant contends that after recording the offer and acceptance of both the parties and their counsel learned Judge Family Court ought to have adjourned the case for further thinking whether the matter should be decided on merits or on special oath. Since the learned appellate Court has not granted this opportunity, the impugned order is liable to be set aside and the case should be remanded for its decision afresh on merits by the learned lower appellate court.
' In support of her contention learned counsel for the petitioner/ defendant has relied upon PLD 2008 Peshawar 95.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitionertdefendant and going through the documents appended with the petition, I find that the appeal was fixed for arguments before the learned Additional District Judge. Burewala on 26-3-2009. On this date, the petitioner/defendant as well as his counsel, instead of arguing the appeal on merits opted- to offer Shamim Ahmad Khan/father of respondent No,3/plaintiff and his counsel present in court for decision of the case on the special oath of Shamim Ahmad Khan. This offer was accepted by him as well as his counsel and required oath was also taken in the court by Shamim Ahmad Khan/father of respondent No,3/ plaintiff.
' It is evident from above that no body from the side of the respondent No,3/plaintiff or the court prompted or compelled the petitioner/defendant or his counsel for decision of the case on special oath of the Holy Quran. It was Tasaduq Hussain/petitioner/defendant and his counsel themselves who asked Shamim Ahmad Khan/ father of respondent No,3/plaintiff and his counsel for decision of appeal on oath which was accepted by Shamim Ahmad Khan and his counsel whereafter Shamim Ahmad Khan/father of respondent No,3/plaintiff took the demanded oath.
6. After himself doing all this, now it does not lie in the mouth of the A petitioner/defendant to back out from his statement for one reason or the other. The offer made by the petitioner/defendant and his counsel was voluntary in nature. It is binding upon the petitioner defendant. The learned Additional District Judge rightly dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner/ defendant against the judgment and decree dated 314-2009 passed by the learned Judge Family Court Burewala District Vehari in terms of the offer. The citation relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the case. In view of above, writ petition is not maintainable and the same is dismissed in limine.
C.M. No,1/2010 ' Since main writ petition has been dismissed by this Court today, therefore, this miscellaneous petition seeking interim relief has lost its relevance. Dismissed.