Islamabad, April 20 In a key verdict, the Lahore High Court has held that a woman has the right to recover her full deferred dower even after obtaining a divorce through Khula, as the dissolution of marriage due to the husband’s misconduct does not impact her entitlement adversely.
In his ruling, Justice Raheel Kamran held that under Islamic law and the 'Nikahnama' (the binding marriage contract), the husband remains obligated to pay dower unless the wife seeks Khula (dissolution of marriage) without any fault on his part, but in the case concerned, the woman had furnished credible evidence of her husband's cruelty and disrespectful conduct, which prompted her to seek separation.
The concept of Khula is based on verses No 228 and 229 of the holy Quran's Surah Al-Baqarah, and its application was found in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, and subsequently, he said, the Dawn reported on Sunday.
Justice Kamran also cited a Federal Shariat Court judgement which held that where a wife obtains Khula merely on the basis of dislike for her husband, the dower received by her is returnable, but when she seeks Khula due to fault on the part of the husband and provides reasonable justification, it is not valid to require from her the return of the dower already received by her.
In such an eventuality, it is for the court to determine the amount the wife should return, keeping in view facts and circumstances of the case.
Stressing the Nikahnama is a valid and binding contract between wife and husband, and deferred dower is a contractual obligation undertaken by the husband, the judge said that unless there were valid legal grounds to deviate from the terms of this contract, the husband is bound to fulfill his obligation.
"The mere fact that the wife sought Khula does not automatically nullify this contractual obligation,” he maintained.
The judge reiterated that in order to determine the entitlement of a wife seeking Khula to the claim of deferred dower, the key consideration is the reason for her seeking Khula.
Where a wife seeks Khula on the ground that she dislikes her husband, without any fault on the part of the husband, she loses her right to deferred dower in the same way as in the case of prompt dower, he maintained.
Conversely, if the husband’s conduct compels the wife to seek dissolution, she retains her entitlement to the deferred dower, the judge added.
The judge noted that in this case, since the marriage lasted nine years and the wife fulfilled her marital obligations, denying her the deferred dower would be unjust. He distinguished the case from earlier judgments cited by the petitioner’s counsel, where cruelty by the husband was not proven.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor