1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, C.J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by an ex-male partner in a marriage contract against the affirmation of the dissolution of the marriage through the ground of Khula` in writ jurisdiction.
2. The only point urged is that while granting Khula' no direction for the return of monetary benefits has been made in favour of the petitioner. It appears that the learned Judge in the High Court was satisfied that the dissolution impugned in the High Court was based on evidence and there was no infirmity, legal or otherwise. However, by way of abundant caution some observation in the case of Akhlaq Ahmad v. Kishwar Sultana PLD 1983 Supreme Court 169 was made. It was observed that if the petitioner was so keen for the return of benefits if any, he could file a suit.
3. In so far as the said observation goes it is the right of the petitioner to seek the remedy but in a case like the present one, he not having insisted upon at proper stage for the determination of the exact benefits received by the respondent's side nor for their return as it might have been thought below his dignity to do so, the same could not be asked for in the writ jurisdiction of the High Court which is highly discretionary. Therefore, in addition to what the High Court observed we feel that it was not a fit case for grant of relief asked for in the discretionary writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
4. Accordingly, the impugned judgment is unexceptionable for this additional reason also. And hence the matter now finally stands closed. It will be futile exercise for the petitioner to file a fresh civil suit.
5. Leave is refused.