' This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, arises out of a suit for dissolution of marriage filed by respondent No,2 against the petitioner, seeking dissolution of her marriage inter alia on the ground of Khula. The Family Court after recording the evidence of the parties decided all other issues in favour of the petitioner, but proceeded to dissolve the marriage holding that it was not possible for the parties to live together as husband and wife and, therefore, the respondent was entitled to have the marriage dissolved on the ground of Khula. It was observed that the petitioner had failed to prove that any benefits were received by the respondent No,2 from him in lieu of the marriage. The respondent was held entitled to Khula on the condition that she would not be entitled to claim her dower. This decree of the Family Court has been assailed by the petitioner by filing the present Constitutional petition before this Court.
2. Malik Allah Yar Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the finding of the learned Judge Family Court on issue No,5 relating to Khula is not based upon any evidence and as the Court itself had found all other issues in favour of the petitioner, it was not entitled to grant decree for dissolution. The learned counsel relied upon Lal Muhammad v. Mst. Gul Bibi and another PLD 1986 Quetta 185.
3. The contention of the learned counsel is not well-founded. It is since-long well settled that if on the basis of the material on the record or circumstances prevailing in the case the conscience of the Court is satisfied that it shall not be possible for the parties to live together as husband and wife within the limits prescribed by Allah, the spouses should be separated on the ground of Khula.
In the present case, though the marriage had taken place on 11th August, 1980, the parties, according to the case of the petitioner himself, have lived together only for about one year. There is no issue from the marriage. The petitioner, while appearing as DW 3 categorically stated that both the mother as well as aunt of respondent No,1 were women of bad character. It is also the case of the petitioner that despite all efforts made by him, the respondent had not restored her conjugal society to him. While appearing as P.W.3 respondent No,2 depose that she had developed aversion and hatred towards the petitioner and it was not possible for her to live with him. It was ruled by the Supreme Court in Dr. Akhlaq Ahmad v. Kishwar Sultana and others (PLD 1983 SC 169) that the Court is entitled to form the opinion as regards Khula, after taking into consideration all the factors including how the parties had conducted themselves during the trial of the suit. It was further observed that the discretion exercised by the Family Court in dissolving the marriage cannot be interfered with in the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court except when it is Town to have been exercised unjustly and improperly.
' There is no force in this petition, which is dismissed in limine.