MUHAMMAD FARRUKH IRFAN KHAN, J.--- Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 the petitioner calls in question the validity of impugned judgments dated 18.10.2014 and 02.02.2016. Through the former the learned Judge Family Court decreed the suit of respondent No,1 for recovery of dowry articles against the petitioner in the following terms:- "In view of my findings on above issues, suit of the plaintiff is decreed in a way that plaintiff is entitled to recover dowry articles as per list Exh.P2 except the articles mentioned at serial Nos,1, 22 and 27 to 29 or alternative thereto price Rs,50,000/- only."
Through the latter judgment learned Appellate Court dismissed appeal of the petitioner filed against the judgment and decree of the learned Judge Family Court.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned judgments and decrees of the learned courts below are based on surmises and conjectures and result of misreading and non- reading of evidence; that admittedly Rukhsati did not take place, therefore, question of giving dowry articles to respondent No,1 does not arise; that the petitioner is not in possession of any dowry articles belonging to respondent No,1; that the petitioner proved this fact through cogent and reliable evidence but both the courts below have failed to take into consideration the same and relied upon the weakest evidence of respondent No,1; that evidence in this case has not been properly appreciated by the learned courts below and the conclusion drawn therefrom is liable to be set-aside. 4.I have heard the arguments of the learned. counsel for the' petitioner and gone through the record.
5. Respondent No,1 cannot be non-suited merely for the reasons that Rukhsati did not take place. It is an admitted fact that a dispute had arisen between the parties on the day of Barat. It is established phenomenon in our society that generally dowry articles are delivered to the house of bridegroom a few days prior to Rukhsati. Respondent No,1 has specifically taken a plea that dowry articles were delivered one week prior to Barat which fact had gone unrebutted, therefore, both the courts below rightly arrived at a conclusion that dowry articles were delivered prior to the date of Rukhsati and no exception can be drawn therefrom.
6.The stance of the petitioner that nothing in the shape of dowry articles was given to respondent No,1 is not acceptable. It is customary in our society that parents do give dowry articles to their daughters merely as a token of love and symbol of honour and the petitioner has miserably failed to bring on record anything from which it could be inferred that something contrary to the settled norms was happened in respondent's case. I have also gone through the decreed items and am of the considered view that the same area of daily use and usually given to a daughter at the time of marriage by the parents even having unsound financial background. The alternate price assessed in lieu of the dowry articles by the learned Judge Family Court and affirmed by the learned Appellate Court is also very reasonable. Concurrent findings of facts in the absence of any illegality or irregularity need no interference by this Court in its Constitutional jurisdiction. Reliance is placed on case reported as Muhammad Habib v. Mst. Sofia Bibi and others (2008 SCM R 1584).
7.It is very sad to note that the petitioner has preferred writ petition against a decree of Rs,50,000/-. By now the legislature has prohibited filing of appeal upto Rs,50,000/- by way of amendment in subsection 2(b) of Section 14 of the Punjab Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 2015.
It appears that the petitioner is trying to drag the respondent/ plaintiff in frivolous litigation as such creating hurdles in the process of justice. It is the bounden duty of the Courts not to allow any party to abuse the process of Court and imposition of suitable cost may be one of the modes to curtail unnecessary and frivolous litigation. The petitioner has filed instant petition to achieve ulterior motives which is required to be dismissed with imposition of exemplary costs.
8. Resultantly, this petition being without any substance is dismissed with cost of Rs,20,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the learned Judge Family Court within 30 days from the date hereof and respondent No,1 will be entitled to draw the same after adopting due procedure. In case of failure of the petitioner in depositing the cost, the learned Judge Family Court shall recover the same as arrears of land. Copy of this judgment be sent to respondent No,1 for information.