 |
Jurisdiction in family case⚖️ علاقائی دائرۂ اختیار پر اعتراض کب اٹھایا جا سکتا ہے؟سپریم کورٹ آف پاکستان نے قرار دیا کہ فیملی مقدمے میں علاقائی دائرۂ اختیار پر اعتراض مقدمے کے ابتدائی مرحلے میں اٹھانا ضروری ہے۔ 🔹 مقدمے کا معاملہ فرازیانہ یاسمین اور دیگر نے نان و نفقہ، جہیز کے سامان اور سونے کے زیورات سے متعلق دعویٰ دائر کیا۔ مقدمے کی سماعت کے دوران فریقِ مخالف نے علاقائی دائرۂ اختیار پر بروقت اعتراض نہیں اٹھایا، جس کے باعث اس معاملے پر باقاعدہ مسئلہ بھی طے نہیں ہوا۔ 🔹 قانونی اصول ضابطۂ دیوانی 1908 کی دفعہ 21 کے مطابق، مقدمہ دائر کرنے کی جگہ سے متعلق اعتراض اپیل یا نظرثانی میں اسی وقت قابلِ سماعت ہو سکتا ہے جب ابتدائی عدالت میں بروقت اعتراض کیا گیا ہو اور دائرۂ اختیار کی غلطی کے نتیجے میں انصاف کی ناکامی بھی ہوئی ہو۔ 🔹 سپریم کورٹ کا فیصلہ عدالت نے واضح کیا کہ جب فریق مقدمے کی کارروائی میں حصہ لے، بروقت اعتراض نہ کرے اور مقدمے کا فیصلہ میرٹ پر ہو جائے تو بعد میں محض علاقائی دائرۂ اختیار کی بنیاد پر فیصلے کو چیلنج نہیں کیا جا سکتا، جب تک انصاف کی ناکامی ثابت نہ ہو۔ 🔹 اہم قانونی نکتہ علاقائی دائرۂ اختیار پر اعتراض مقدمے کے ابتدائی مرحلے میں اٹھانا چاہیے۔ تاخیر سے اٹھایا گیا اعتراض، انصاف کی ناکامی ثابت کیے بغیر، قابلِ قبول نہیں ہوتا۔ 📚 حوالہ: 2026 SCMR 1743، PLJ 2026 SC 68 مقدمہ: Farzana Yasmeen and others v. Sohail Ahmed and another |
Must read judgment.
2026 SCMR 1743
PLJ 2026 SC 68
Notwithstanding the fact that rule 6 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Rules, 1965 does not identify the nature of suit to be filed by the petitioners before the court where she was currently residing, yet it was never challenged in the form of preliminary objection which has resulted in the non-framing of issue and conclusion of trial. Although the family Court has decided the suit on its own procedure but so far as the territorial jurisdiction is concerned, that is, primary and substantially covered by section 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which provides that a party would not be allowed to object as to the place of suing at the appellate or revisional court unless such objection was taken in the court of first instance at the earliest possible opportunity and in all cases where issues are settled at or before such settlement and unless there has been a consequent failure of justice.
Objections to territorial and pecuniary jurisdiction must be raised at the earliest stage before or at the time of settlement of issues. Raising it at a later stage was considered highly prejudicial and contrary to justice. So, once the case has proceeded and judgment is given, a defect in territorial or pecuniary jurisdiction is then treated as only a technical error. It is significant to note that section 21 of C.P.C. provides that [“an” objection] as, to the place of suing shall not be allowed by any appellate or revisional Court unless there was “a consequent failure of justice”. The suit was contested by respondent and after trial judgment was announced on merit; it caused no prejudice insofar as territorial jurisdiction is concerned. It ought to have been resisted and agitated at the earliest. The principle is that if an issue, to the extent of jurisdiction of a Court or Tribunal is not framed in the court of first instance it cannot be raised as point for consideration. Indeed the suit of petitioners is neither for dissolution of marriage nor for dower, infact, it was for maintenance, dowry articles and gold ornaments, which class of claim does not fall in the proviso to rule 6 of Rules of 1965 and would have been filed where cause of action wholly or in part arisen and/or where parties last resided together. However, the trial was allowed to be concluded without an issue of territorial jurisdiction being pressed by respondent.
Civil Petition No. 3606 of 2025
Farzana Yasmeen and others vs Sohail Ahmed and another.
Ch Yasir Ilyas Gujjar
ADVOCATE