SAFDAR SALEEM SHAHID, J.:- Through instant writ petition, the petitioner has called in question the validity of judgment and decree dated 19.09.2018 passed by learned Judge Family Court, Yazman as well as judgment and decree dated 22.12.2018 passed by learned Addl. District Judge, Yazman.
2. Brief facts necessary for decision of instant writ petition are that Mst. Rehana Rashad (respondent No.3) filed a suit for recovery of maintenance, dowry articles and dower against the petitioner with the contention that her marriage was solemnized with the petitioner on 22.06.2014 in lieu of dower mentioned in the petition and she started performing matrimonial obligations. Parties remained issueless. In the beginning, attitude of the petitioner remained pleasant but afterwards it became toxic towards respondent No.3. When respondent No.3 demanded maintenance allowance and dower, the petitioner ousted her from his house. On 02.10.2017, the petitioner divorced respondent No.3. The dower, dowry and maintenance allowance from the date of desertion, was not paid to respondent No.3. The suit was contested by the petitioner by filing written statement wherein it was contended that the petitioner(defendant) had paid 21/2 tola gold ornaments and cash Rs.125,000/-. However, petitioner admitted that 3-Marla plot is yet to be delivered and he is ready to give the same to respondent No.3. Out of divergent pleadings of the parties, issues were framed by the learned Trial Court on 01.02.2018.
3. On 01.02.2018 with the consent of the parties, suit of the respondent No.3 (plaintiff) for recovery of maintenance allowance was decreed only to the extent of Iddat period @ Rs.3000/- per month. On 23.05.2018 the petitioner (defendant) absented himself form the Trial Court and he was proceeded against ex-parte. In the light of ex parte oral as well as documentary evidence, the claim of respondent No.3 (plaintiff) to the extent of electronic appliances was dismissed and to the extent of rest of dowry articles, she was held entitled to get Rs.80,000/- as its alternate price. Suit of respondent No.3 (plaintiff) for recovery of dower was decreed to the extent of 3-Marla plot and she was held entitled to receive Rs.10,00,000/- from the petitioner as its alternate price while rest of claim for recovery of dower i.e. Rs.1,25,000/- and 2 1/2 tola gold ornaments was dismissed.
4. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner preferred his appeal before the Court of learned Addl. District Judge, which was dismissed by the said Court vide judgment and decree dated 22.12.2018. Hence, this writ petition.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that impugned judgments and decrees to the extent of alternate price of three marla plot have been passed by the Courts below while ignoring the relevant law and facts of the case, therefore, same are not sustainable in the eyes of law; respondent No.3 could not prove her claim with regard to alternate price of the said plot through cogent and reliable evidence but the courts below remained unable to appreciate this aspect of the case; impugned judgments and decrees of the courts below to this extent are the result of mis- reading and non-reading of evidence and have been passed without applying the judicial mind.
6. Learned counsel for respondent No.3, on the other hand, argued that impugned judgments and decrees have been passed by the Courts below quite in accordance with law; no illegality or material irregularity has been pointed out by learned counsel for the petitioner in the impugned judgments and decrees. Prays for dismissal of instant writ petition.
7. Arguments heard. Record perused.
8. It has been noticed that vide order of this Court dated 13.02.2020, the matter to the extent of dowry articles and maintenance allowance was settled between the parties relevant portion of which is is reproduced as under:- "By filing this petition, the petitioner has assailed the legality and propriety of judgments passed by learned courts below whereby the suit of the respondent No.3/ex -wife of petitioner for maintenance, dower and dowry articles stood decreed mainly on the grounds of against law and facts, and as such not sustainable.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the very outset, to show petitioner's bona-fide and approaching this Court with all fairness has not pressed this petition to the extent of decreed maintenance allowance and dowry articles. However, prays that petitioner may be permitted to pay alternate price of dowry articles i.e. Rs.80,000/- in four equal installments, each of Rs.20,000/- payable before the learned Executing Court as per following schedule:- 1st installment on 13.03.2020.
2nd installment on 13.05.2020.
3rd installment on 13.07.2020 4th installment on 14.09.2020 Further adds that in case of any default in payment of single installment as per schedule given above, the entire outstanding amount shall become recoverable forthwith. Order accordingly.
3. The Writ Petition to the extent of decree for maintenance allowance and dowry articles is dismissed and in terms of Section 13 of the Family Court Act, 1964 the petitioner is permitted to make payment of alternate price of dowry articles in the installments as undertaken supra and to this extent such undertaking be read as part of this order.
4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that affidavit tendered in evidence does not bear endorsement of any oath commissioner /notary public etc and as such same cannot be termed as evidence and this legal aspect was not considered by learned courts below while passing the decree of dower. Reliance has been placed on "BASHIR AHMAD VS. ABDUL WAHID" (PLD 1995 Lahore 98) and "Master MUHAMMAD BASHIR VS. MOINUDDIN" (1990 CLC 703).
Further submits that the petitioner is ready to pay dower by transfer of property situated in District Bahawalpur and not in city Bahawalpur as no description of such property is mentioned in Nikah Nama."
As per order reproduced above, writ petition to the extent of decreed maintenance allowance and dowry articles was not pressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, therefore, the same was dismissed to this extent. However, in terms of Section 13 of the Family Court Act, 1964, the petitioner was permitted to make payment of alternate price of dowry articles in installments as undertaken by him in para No.2 of the order ibid.
9. So far as the claim of respondent No.3 regarding 3-Marla plot as Haq-ul-Mehr (mentioned in column No.16 of Nikah Nama) is concerned, the lady has claimed 3-Marla Plot or its alternate price Rs.1,000,000/-. Perusal of record reveals that in the headnote and prayer clause of the plaint, the lady has claimed alternate price of the said plot as Rs.1,000,000/- without mentioning the detail thereof in the plaint. In order to resolve controversy between the parties, Nikah Nama is the basic document which Column No.16 only disclosed 'Three Marla Plot' but no location/description/detail of area/alternate price or anything else about plot has been mentioned. Although, the petitioner has admitted fixation of 3-Marla Plot yet he has also not given any detail thereof in his written statement. When no detail of location/ description of area, alternate price or anything else with regard to 3-Marla Plot is available, both the parties are interpreting the same as per their wishes at their own end. The onus to prove the alternate price of the said plot as claimed was on the shoulder of the lady. The affidavits of respondent No.3 (plaintiff) and her witnesses, namely, Waseem Ullah and Hafeez-ur-Reman tendered before the Trial Court are also silent about the description of said plot or its alternate price i.e. Rs.1,000,000/-. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner did not produce any evidence in rebuttal as he was proceeded against ex-parte on 23.05.2018. The petitioner did not cross-examine the witnesses of respondent No.3. The petitioner in his written statement not only admitted the fixation of 3-Marla Plot but also stated that he is ready to pay the alternate price of plot. Despite the fact that respondent No.3 had claimed alternate price of the plot as Rs.10,00,000/- in headnote and prayer clause of plaint only and petitioner had also admitted fixation of said dower i.e. 3-Marla plot but she could not prove its location or alternate price by producing cogent and convincing evidence. In such situation it was the Court to thrash out the grain from the chaff but the Courts below erred in law while fixing the alternate price of 3- Marla Plot i.e. Rs.1,000,000/-, only on the basis of mentioning the price in headnote and prayer clause of the plaint, therefore, findings to the extent of alternate price of 3-Marla Plot fixed as dower arrived at by the Courts below are not sustainable and are liable to be set aside. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the parties are residents of Bahawalpur City, the impugned decrees are modified to the extent that respondent No.3 is held entitled to get 3-Marla Plot (mentioned in column No.16 of Nikah Nama) in any urban residential area of Bahawalpur City.
10. In view of what has been discussed above, the instant writ petition stands accepted in terms mentioned supra, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
11. Before parting with this judgment, it has been noticed with great concern that columns with regard to dower are filled in carelessly by the concerned persons which create ambiguity in the cases where the marriage tie dissolves. This type of ambiguity entangles the people into longtime litigation even up to the Apex Court, which results into loss of precious time and financial resources.
The people at the eve of marriages of their children, in view of their preoccupation in other matters, do not take care to get filled in the columns of Nikah Nama relating to complete detail of dower, like prompt/deferred or anything i.e. property/gold, in lieu thereof. Furthermore, most of the Nikah Registrars while filling the columns in stereotype manner, do not have the knowledge of the consequences of incomplete/incorrect filling thereof. In this regard some immediate and necessary steps should be taken by the Government of Punjab, by providing training to the Nikah Registrars, in order to avoid the creation of such like situation in future and to eradicate such like ambiguities between the spouses and their families. So, Government of Punjab is directed to look into the matter, make arrangements for proper education/training of Nikah Registrars, so that such like situation should be avoided/eradicated in future.