1. Both, the plaintiff and the defendant are aggrieved of the judgment and decree of learned District Judge, Anantnag, in civil suit titled Mst. Naseema v. Syed Nissar Hussain (File No.205/N) though for different reasons. The appellant is aggrieved that learned trial judge has held the Mehar (Dower), fixed at the time of marriage of the parties as 2500 Ashrafis (God Sovereign) regardless of the evidence on the file, the spirit of Shariah and the provisions of Jammu & Kashmir Muslim Dower Act and proceeded to pass a decree for Rs.7,56,000/- against the appellant. The respondent in her objections treated as cross appeal is aggrieved that learned trial judge has arbitrarily held one Ashrafi equal to 1.250 gms of gold and thus refused to grant a decree in favour of the respondent for an amount of Rs.96,25,000/- representing market value of 2.50 Kgs gold (2500 Ahsrafis of 10 gm each).

2. The admitted facts are as under:

The appellant entered into a wedlock with the respondent on 11.10.1976 at Munda, Qazigund, Anantnag. The Mehar was fixed as 2500 Ashrafis out of which 900 Ashrafis were fixed as "Moujal" or prompt and 1600 as "Movajal" or deferred. The parties after their marriage had cordial relations for some time and two children--son and a daughter, were born out of the wedlock. The relations between the parties about two decades after their marriage became strained and according to the respondent the appellant disclosed in a meeting of respectables convened to resolve dispute between the parties that the appellant had divorced the respondent and thus acquired knowledge of the divorce on the said date. The respondent thereafter filed suit as an indigent person in the court of Principal District Judge, Anantnag, for recovery of dower both prompt and deferred which according to the respondent had remained unpaid and was thus recoverable from the appellant. The respondent also prayed for an amount of Rs.6,666/- on account of maintenance for the period of Iddat. The appellants stand before the trial court was that in lieu of the prompt dower an amount of Rs.25000/- was paid to the respondent immediately after the marriage and golden ornaments worth Rs.60,000/- were given to the respondent by the appellant from time to time after their marriage and agreed by the parties to have satisfied the respondents claim for deferred dower. In short, the appellant pleaded that no amount on account of dower--prompt or deferred had remained unpaid. It was averred that the respondent had with the help of her relations forcibly taken over possession of the appellants residential house at Shajipora and has been eversince in possession of the house as also the movable belonging to the appellant in the house. The appellant denied that the dower fixed at the time of marriage was 2500 golden sovereign but instead that the amount of dower was 2500 pound sterling i.e. currency of United Kingdom and that whole amount of dower had been paid. The appellant insisted that 2500 Ashrafis "Sika Raijul Waqat" was exaggerated.

3. The learned trial judge on perusal of the pleadings and other material settled following issues:-

"1. Whether at the time of Nikah ceremony dower to the plaintiff was fixed 2500 gold sovereign. Whether the plaintiff is an indigent and is entitled to receive the amount of dower as mentioned? OPP.

2. Whether the plaintiff got the knowledge of divorce on 12.10.1987? OPP

3. Whether the plaintiff is entitled to claim maintenance for the period of Iddat? OPP.

4. Whether the defendant made the payment to the plaintiff from time to time, if yes, what is its effect on the suit? OPD.

5. Whether the matrimonial relation between the parties seized from year 1995 and the plaintiff deliberately separated from the defendant? OPD.

6. Whether the plaintiff is in illegal possession of the immovable property of the defendant? OPD.

7. To what relief the plaintiff is entitled to?"

4. The respondent examined five witnesses, Syed Ghulam Ahmad, Nizam-ud-Din, Syed Hussain Buk

Click Here to Read the rest of this document