Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD SALAHUDDIN KHAN versus MUHAMMAD NAZIR SIDDIQI

Section 7 (1) (3) will be effective only after the notice of the student is given to the chairman and when the husband is not given the notice of divorce to the chairman, it is provided for reconciliation between the heirs party. Is. It is believed that he has dismissed the students; under section 7 (1) the husband has no notice of the required leniency by the husband; in view of the explicit orders of section 7 (3), the divorce has not been effective yet. Was. o the Chairman and the period of three months provided for bringing out a reconciliation between the parties has expired. Where the husband does not give a notice of Talaq to the Chairman, it can be deemed that he has revoked the Talaq. While in the second case, namely, Abdul Mannan v. Safuran Nessa the view taken by this Court appears with great clarity from the following extract there from :‑

"The learned counsel for the petitioner concedes that no notice of the alleged divorce was given to the Chairman as required by section 7(1) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance. That being so the alleged divorce, in view of the express provision of subsection (3) of section 7 of the said Ordinance, is yet to become effective."

It is manifest, therefore, that the view expressed by the Lahore High Court in Rafiq's case, which view was relied upon in his impugned judgment by the learned Judge while accepting the revision petition filed by the respondents, cannot be supported and is, in fact, erroneous.

Be that as it may we are not inclined to exercise our discretionary jurisdiction of granting leave to appeal to this Court to the petitioner in view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case.

This petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

M Z. M. Petition dismissed.