SMT. RABIA KHATOON Vs. MOHD. MUKHTAR AHMAD
LAWS(ALL)-1965-11-33
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on November 23,1965

Smt. Rabia Khatoon Appellant
VERSUS
Mohd. Mukhtar Ahmad Respondents


Cited Judgements :-

BEENA VS. B. MOHAMMED KHAN [LAWS(KER)-2015-1-15] [REFERRED TO]
SK. JANU MAHAMMAD VS. AYASA BIBI [LAWS(ORI)-1970-11-20] [REFERRED TO]
BEENA VS. B MOHAMMED KHAN @ B M KHAN [LAWS(KER)-2014-1-170] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

UNIYAL, J. - (1.)THESE three connected second appeals have been referred to us by a learned single Judge as he was of the view that the opinion expressed by Mahmud, J. in the case of Abdul Kadir v. Salima, (1886) ILR 8 All 149 (FB) that a Mohammedan wife has no right to refuse herself to bet husband if her prompt dower is not paid when the marriage has been consummated with her consent, is in the nature of an obiter dictum and requires reconsideration.
(2.)THE facts giving rise to these appeals may now be stated. Two suits were filed, one by Smt. Rabia Khatoon against her husband for dissolution of marriage and the other by Mohammad Mukhtar Ahmad against the wife for restitution of conjugal rights Parties were married in 1948. The marriage was consummated with the consent of the wife and a son was born of the wedlock in 1951 The wife went to her fathers house shortly after the birth of the child in 1951. Mohammad Mukhtar, the husband, went to brine his wife Smt. Rabia Khatoon some time in April or May 1951 but she refused to come back. No maintenance allowance was paid by the husband to the wife since 1951, and the suit giving rise to these appeals came to be filed in 1956.
In the suit filed by the wife it was alleged that in spite of demand the husband had not paid her prompt dower which was settled at Rs. 5,000; that she continued to perform her marital relations with her husband for over two years and a child was born to them; that the husband treated her cruelly and beat her and turned her out of the house, with the result that she was obliged to take shelter in her fathers house and was living there ever since. She alleged that her husband had failed to maintain her during all these years and bad not paid her prompt dower to which she was entitled.

(3.)IN his written statement the husband denied that he treated his wife cruelly or that she was forced to leave his house due to ill treatment, He alleged that the dower payable to the wife was deferred dower and that it was only Rs. 500. In the counter suit filed by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights similar pleas were raised by the parties.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.