' IBAD-UR-REHMAN LODHI, J.---A suit for dissolution of marriage was filed by the present petitioner mainly on the ground of cruelty, inhuman attitude of the defendant and hatred inculcated in the petitioner's mind as against respondent No, 1/defendant on account of unbecoming and nefarious conduct of the respondent. The defendant/ respondent No,1 was proceeded against ex parte in the said suit.
' In ex parte evidence, when the petitioner appeared as her own witness, she, in addition to the stance taken in the plaint, has also made statement to the effect that she also demanded the dissolution of marriage on the basis of `Khula'. The learned Judge Family Court, Rawalpindi while proceeded to decree the suit, granted the same on the ground of `Khula' in lieu of dower.
2. The petitioner has challenged the said findings through the present Constitutional petition before this Court by making the following prayer:-- "It is, therefore, respectfully prayed that while exercising writ jurisdiction conferred upon this honourable court under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, this honourable court may graciously be called upon to declare the impugned judgment and decree dated 13-2-2014 as illegal and without jurisdiction and decree for divorce be awarded on the grounds enumerated in the plaint. "
' From the contents of the above prayer and also the manner of arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner, the intention of the petitioner seems to be to avoid the condition attached with the decree for dissolution of marriage for return of dower, as otherwise no challenge would be available to the petitioner to call in question the decree granted in her favour.
3. In order to determine as to whether any challenge to the conditional decree as was granted by the learned Judge Family Court, Rawalpindi would be available within the meaning of section 14 of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 or only the Constitutional remedy within the meaning of Article 199 of Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 is the remedy in given situation, the examination of section 14(2)(a) of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 and section 2(viii)(d) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 would be relevant. Both said Sections are reproduced herein below for ready reference:- "Section 14(2)(a) of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964: for dissolution of marriage, except in the case of dissolution of reasons specified in clause (d) of item (viii) of section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939, Section 2(viii)(d) of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939: disposes of her property or prevents her exercising her legal rights over it, or
4. This Court, in case of Naila Azmat v. Judge Family Court and others (1999 M LD 3090), has held that where dissolution is qualified by condition of certain consideration for 'Khula' and unless that condition is fulfilled, dissolution would not attain finality and, as such, said decree is not hit by section 14(2)(a) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 and a person aggrieved of such condition can competently file an appeal under section 14 of the Act and also move application for condonation of delay, if there is any delay in filing of such appeal.
' Earlier in case of Farzana Shaheen v. Malik Muhammad lqbal (1989 M LD 3888), it was held that where marriage was dissolved by Family. Court on the ground of 'Khula', lady has a right to challenge the same before the appellate Court to the extent of conditions attached to such a decree regarding return of benefits to husband without impairing integrity of decree for dissolution of marriage.
' Similar was the view of this Court in case of Bashira Bibi v. Muhammad Rafiq and 2 others (182 CLC 1200), when it was held that a decree for dissolution of marriage by way of 'Khula' on condition of return of 5-tolas gold ornaments or in alternative payment of Rs, 3600 is appealable.
5. In the present case the position is almost same as in the reported cases noted hereinabove, thus it would be left at the discretion of the petitioner to challenge the condition attached with the decree for dissolution of marriage by filing an appeal in view of section 14 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964, if so advised.
6. The learned counsel for petitioner has also raised his grievance that on 13-2-2014, no statement whatsoever was got recorded of the petitioner by the learned Judge Family Court and the petitioner was only asked to put her signature on a blank paper and subsequently whatever was recorded it was given the status of her statement, wherein the decree on the basis of 'Khula' was also included in her such statement.
7. I would not comment in detail on this aspect of the matter lest it may prejudice the case of either side before the appellate Court in case any appeal is filed against the order of learned Judge Family Court, however, the manner in which the signatures are shown to have been obtained on the stated statement of petitioner on 13-2-2014 do reveal that the same were not obtained after completion of writing on the relevant paper. However, it would be for the learned appellate Court to adjudicate upon such matter if in the appeal (if filed) this issue would be raised.
8. With these observations, the present petition is disposed of.