This writ petition has been filed on behalf of Mst. Shamim Akhtar petitioner on the ground that the judgments and decrees dated 24-2-1999 and 18-1-2000 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Haroonabad and the learned District Judge, Bahawalnagar are illegal and are the result of non-reading and misreading of the evidence and as such the same are liable to be set aside.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner/plaintiff filed a suit in the Court of the learned Judge Family Court, Haroonabad for the recovery of dowry of the value of Rs.75,000, against respondent No.3, on the plea that at the time of marriage with the aforesaid respondent, her parents had given her dowry of the value of Rs.75,000 and which she had taken to the house of respondent No.3 and which was still lying there. She obtained divorce through Court on 21-11-1997 from respondent No.3 but her former husband i.e. Respondent No.3 refused to return her dowry articles. He contested the suit filed by her. After the trial, the learned Judge, Family Court, dismissed her suit vide his judgment and decree dated 24-2-1999. Aggrieved of the aforesaid judgment and decree the petitioner filed an appeal in the Court of the learned District Judge, Bahawalnagar.
However, the same was also dismissed on 18-1-2000. Hence this writ petition.
3. Arguments have been heard and record perused:
4. The judgment of the learned District Judge, Bahawalnagar dated 18-1-2000 and also the judgment of the learned Judge Family Court, Haroonabad dated 24-2-1999, copies of which are appended with the writ petition, indicate that both the Courts below had taken into consideration the evidence of the parties which had been recorded during the trial. There is no force in the argument that the judgments and decrees of the learned Courts below were result of non-reading or misreading of the evidence. Even otherwise, while exercising the writ jurisdiction, it is not possible to undertake an extensive appraisal of the evidence produced by the parties so as to find out that the impugned judgments and decrees are the result of any non-reading or misreading of evidence. Evidently, the learned trial Court as well as the learned First Appellate Court had taken into consideration the statements of the witnesses of the petitioner as well as of respondent No.3 and had delivered the judgments after attending to the evidence existing on record. Consequently there is no justification to declare that the impugned judgments and decrees dated 24-2-1999 and 18-1-2000 passed by the learned Courts below are illegal or without lawful authority.
5. The writ petition is clearly without any lawful basis and same is accordingly dismissed.