' Through this Constitutional Petition Mst. Bilqees Fatima, petitioner wants this Court to declare judgments and decrees dated 8-12-1983 and 8-5-1984 passed by Judge Family Court, Jauharabad respondent No. 2 and District Judge, Khushab respondent No. 1 to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect.
2. The facts leading up to this petition briefly are that on 1-2-1983 Mst. Bilqees Fatima petitioner filed suit for dissolution against Shahab 'id-Din respondent No. 3 before Judge, Family Court, Jauharabad. The respondent/husband also filed suit for restitution of conjugal rights against Mst.
Bilquees Fatima petitioner. The suits were consolidated and six issues were framed. Mst. Bilquees Fatima produced Ahmad Saeed P.W.1, Alum Sher P.W.2, Mureed Azlz Khan P.W. 3 and herself appeared as P.W.4. Shahab-ud-Din respondent appeared as D.W.3. He produced Hakam Ali D.W.1 and Ghulam Muhammad D.W.2. The plaintiff also produced documents Exhs. P.1 to P.6. The respondent however did not produce any documents. The trial Court vide its judgment and decree dated 8-12-1983 dismissed both the suits. Feeling aggrieved Mst. Bilquees Fatima filed appeal before the learned District Judge, Khushab which was dismissed on 8-5-1984, hence this petition.
3. Before me the findings of the Courts below on issues No. 4 and 5 have been challenged. The issues are as under:- ' Issue No.4.-- Whether the relations between the parties have become so strained that they cannot live within the limits of God?
' Issue No. 5.-- Whether the plaintiff is entitled to dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula'?
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that the question of Khula' has not been considered in accordance with guiding principles laid down by the superior Courts, inasmuch us the admitted separation of about six years by itself, was sufficient for dissolution of marriage on the ground of Khula' and that the question of Khula' should have been considered by the Courts below uninfluenced by the findings of the Courts on other issues. Reliance has been placed on Mukhtar Ahmad v. Mst. Ume Kalsoom and another PLD 1975 Lah. 805, Mst. Munawar Bibi v. Mehr Muhammad Nawaz Khan, Additional District Judge, Lahore etc. 1982 CLC 1318, Abdul Aziz v. Mst.
Bashiran Bibi PLD 1958 (W.P.) Lah.
59.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I have not been able to persuade myself to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner. I find that the question whether the relations between the parties have become so strained that they could not live within the limits of God is a question of fact. The learned Courts below after having applied conscious mind, have found the issue of Khula' against petitioner/wife. The Courts below have given sound reasons in support of the conclusion arrived at by them. The learned District Judge, has consciously attended to the allegations of non maintenance and separation between the parties. He came to the conclusion that the wife/petitioner and not the husband/ respondent was to be blamed for the separation. He also found that the assertion that the spouses could not live within the limits of God was without any basis. The learned counsel has failed to point out any misreading/non-reading of evidence by the Courts below. I find that the question of Khula' has properly been considered by the Courts below and this question has been determined being uninfluenced by the findings on other issues and that it would not be proper to interfere with the appreciation of the evidence while sitting in writ jurisdiction.
6. For what has been stated above, there being no merit, the petition is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs.