Through this Constitutional petition, Malik Sana Ullah petitioner has challenged a decree for dissolution of marriage passed in favour of respondent No. l vide judgment and decree, dated 9-9- 1991 by the learned Judge, Family Court, Mianwali, on the ground of Khula'.
2. The only grievance raised by Mian Muhammad Akram Ranjha, Advocate, learned counsel for the petitioner is that petty amount of Rs.250 has been determined as amount for return to the petitioner although he should have been granted huge amount spent by the petitioner on the respondent's education. Learned counsel has not challenged the right of respondent No.1 to claim dissolution of marriage on the ground of Khula'.
3. Mr. Zahid Hussain Khan, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent No. l has controverted the factual aspect about the expenses alleged to have been incurred by the petitioner on the education of respondent No. 1.
4. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and I find that there is absolutely no evidence about the alleged expenses which according to the petitioner have been incurred by him on the education of the respondent. Even otherwise I do not consider any such expenses can be considered to be the benefit which is to be returned at the time of claiming Talaq Khula'. I am told the respondent No. l has already married about 8 months earlier. The impugned order is quite lawful, fair and just. No ground has been made out by the learned counsel for the petitioner for interference with the impugned order. The writ petition, therefore, is dismissed with costs.