OAZI JAWAD EHSANULLAH, J.- Mst. Kalsoom Bibi has filed the instant writ petition against the judgments / decrees dated 20.01.2023 and 31.10.2022 rendered respectively by learned District Judge / Zilla Qazi Malakand (at Batkhela) and Civil Judge-III Judge Family Court / Ilaqa Qazi Malakand (at Batkhela) to the extent that while deciding the issue relating to payment of five tolas gold ornaments as dower, the two courts below have erred in law and have totally misconstrued the evidence available on record.
2. Heard. As a matter of record, the petitioner has filed a suit before Family Court at Batkhela, District Malakand inter alia claiming the following relief; In support of her claim, petitioner had produced a dower deed dated 24.12.2014 (Ex PW 4/5) wherein a portion of house and five tolas gold ornaments have been very distinctly mentioned as her dower payable on demand. The said dower deed (Ex PW 4/5) has been held to have been proved and established by the petitioner and so while subscribing to the same, petitioner has been granted part of the dower in form of share in the immovable property, whereas remaining part of dower in the form of five tolas gold ornaments was denied to her by the two courts below on the ground that she had failed to establish that fact that this portion of dower was either not paid to her or was snatched by her husband so as to render the same outstanding against the latter.
3. The findings of the two courts below to this effect appear to be too nave and frail when the same are juxtaposed with the contents of the dower deed (Ex PW 4/5), wherein it was clearly noted that;
4. The use of word in the dower deed (Ex PW 4/5) itself denotes that the same was not paid and was payable on demand. In order to further understand the meaning of word dictionaries have been perused where the meanings of this particular word are as follows; Reliance in this regard may also be made to the judgment of the Lahore High Court rendered in the case of 'Samina vs. Additional District Judge etc. reported in PLJ 2023 Lahore 844. For the facility of reference, relevant para of the ibid judgment is reproduced herein below; "However, the only question which requires determination in this case is that whether the dower amount is prompt or deferred. In this context, perusal of Column No. 13 of the Nikahnamma shows that the dower of Rs. 500,000/-is (Ind-at-Talab). The word "Ind-at-Talab" is the word of Urdu language and its English translation is "on demand" as per "OXFORD Urdu--English Dictionary" of Oxford University Press as well as "FEROZSONS Urdu--English Dictionary" of Ferozsons (Pvt.) Ltd. The Urdu to Urdu Dictionary i.e. defines the word "Ind-at-Talab" in following terms: The above dictionary meanings/translations of "Ind-at-Talab" make it abundantly clearly that the dower in-question is payable on demand."
5. The above expression or payable on demand also presupposes that dower was not paid to the petitioner and was yet to be paid as and when a demand was made by the wife. View in this context, it may also be added that the document Ex PW 4/5 by the name of was subscribed to by the two courts below with respect to part of the dower in form of immovable property and so they could not have made any exception while deciding the case in respect of remaining part of five tolas gold ornaments as dower which was clearly stated to be payable on demand in the same very deed.
6. Resultantly, for what has been discussed above, this petition is allowed and petitioner No. 1 is held entitled to the grant of her prayer with regard to payment of five tolas gold ornaments as her dower which is decreed against respondent No. 1 who is obliged to pay the same to his wife.. The petition in hand is disposed of in the above terms.