Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, has called in question the judgment and decree dated 20.02.2020 passed by the learned District Judge/Judge Model Family Appellate Court, Hangu, whereby , he dismissed his appeal and upheld the judgment and decree dated 12.12.2019 passed by the learned Senior Civil Judge(Judl)/JFC, Hangu, whereby , he accepted the suit of the respondent No.1 in her favour .
2. Facts, in brief, leading to the instant writ petition are that, initially , respondent No.1 had filed a suit before the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge,. Hangu against the present petitioner for recovery of dower @ 10 tolas gold ornaments or market price thereof, mainte nance from 21.10.2017 and onwards @ Rs.10,000/- per month, return of dowry articles as per list annexed with the plaint or market price thereof and delivery expenses (a Rs.20,000/-. The learned Trial Court summoned the present petitioner who accordingly appeared and contested the suit of the respondent No.1 by filing written statement, raising therein several factual and legal objections. A pre-trial reconciliation between the parties was held by the learned Trial Court, however , of no avail. Upon the divergent pleadings of the parties, the learned Trial Court framed as many as 10 issues, including the relief. Thereafter , both the parties were given opportunity of production and recording of evidence in support of their respective stances/claims. The learned Trial Court, after hearing arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, decreed the suit of the respondent No.1 vide judgment and decree dated 12.12.2019. Being aggrieved from the aforesaid decision of the learned Trial Court, petitioner filed appeal before the learned District Judge, Hangu, who, after hearing arguments of the learned counsel for the parties, dismissed the same vide judgment and decree dated 20.02.2020 and maintained the judgment and decree of the learned Trial Court, hence, this writ petition.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner argued that respondent No.1 has failed to prove dower and medical expenses through any record, as such, the grant of decree to this effect is legally not sustainable. He further argued that grant of maintenance is exorbitant; therefore, same is legally not sustainable.
4. Preliminary arguments heard and record perused.
5. Perusal of the record reveals that initially the respondent-wife has claimed 10 Tola gold made ornaments as dower , maintenance Q Rs.10,000/- per month, return of dowry articles and medical expenses in view of the incomplete abortion. There is admission on the part of the petitioner regarding purchase of 10 Tola gold made ornaments for the respondent No.1. It has also been in the evidence that out of 10 Tola gold made ornaments, 02 Tola gold made ornaments remained with the petitioner . The respondent No. 1 has also alleged that twice, incomplete abortion has occurred on account of beating by the petitioner which was not expressly denied by the petitioner , except alleging that no documentary evidence has been brought on the record to this effect, while at the same time, the respondent-wife stated to take oath on the Holy Qur'an regarding such happening while appearing as her witness. PW -2 has supported the stance of the petitioner .
6. Record further transpires that two children of the respondent are in the custody of the petitioner and he has also contracted second marriage. The marriage between the parties is still intact, theref ore, petitioner-husband is bound to maintain the respondent-wife and the maintenance allowance so fixed is not open to any exception.
7. It is well settled that the jurisdiction of this Court in constitutional matters against the judgments of the Family Court is very limited, as this Court cannot substitute the opinion of the learned Trial Court for its own after reappraisal of evidence, because the writ jurisdiction can, in no way, be considered an appellate or revisional forum and it can interfere only in matter concerning law point or any jurisdictional defect in the impugned judgments. In the present case, the learned Family Court as well as the learned Appellate Court, after appraisal and re-appraisal of evidence, have rendered well balanced and well-reasoned findings on each and every issue.
8. In the light of the above, the impugned judgments and decrees of the two Courts below do not suffer from any illegality , infirmity or irregularity; as such, requires no interference of this Court. Accordingly , the instant writ petition, being bereft of any merits, stands dismissed in limine.