Christian Court Marriage on Saturday:
Services of court marriage on Saturday and Christian court marriage in Pakistan is available through Jamila Law Associates. For Court Marriage in Lahore & Court Marriage in Pakistan, U need to Follow the Procedure of Court Marriage in Pakistan & Court Marriage Procedure in Pakistan. The Dowry list produced by the wife was not prepared in the shape of Form D-1 as prescribed in R.4(1) of Dowry and Bridal Gifts (Restriction) Rules, 1976; the same was not to be considered in support of her claim after court marriage on Saturday and Christian court marriage in Pakistan.
Rule of Thumb Would:
Receipts regarding the purchase of household articles based on the rule of thumb Would not qualify and meet the essential requirement of proof of purchase of said articles by parents of wife. It’s giving to her before or after marriage. High Court dismissed the constitutional petition in Circumstances. Christian Marriage was monogamous, i.e., one man, one woman’s lifelong union to exclude all others, and polygamy is not lawful for court marriage on Saturday and Christian court marriage in Pakistan.
Unchasity:
No divorce except on the ground of adultery or unchastity. Marriage without divorce to the existing wife/husband was void and punishable under 5.494, P.P.C. Second marriage is not allowed without divorcing the first wife or meeting her death. A person who had entered a second Marriage or court marriage on Saturday and Christian court marriage in Pakistan without divorcing the existing wife was convicted under S.494, P.P.C. and sentenced to four years’ rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.20,000 and in default of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment six months. The amount of fine, if recovered, was directed to be paid to the first wife.
Christian Court Marriage in Pakistan:
Both plaintiffs’ lives appeared before Court for court marriage on Saturday and Christian court marriage in Pakistan and stated that they would rather die than go with husbands. One of the plaintiffs had alleged that her marriage was solemnized during her minority and under undue influence exercised by a “Peer.” Parties were litigating since 1995, and according to the parties’ statement, they were going through an agonizing and painful situation. Plaintiff women appearing before Court had refused to go with their husbands. Effect.
No Religion:
No religion would allow a hateful union not based on valid consent of parties, especially in the Christian Marriages Act, 1872, where court marriage on Saturday and Christian court marriage in Pakistan was a sacrament. Evidence had established beyond doubt that a vital role in marriage between spouses who were Christian s was performed by one Muslim “Peer” under whose influence parties were wedded. Therefore, the trial Court was not justified in dismissing the suit.
High Court:
Appellate Court had rightly decreed the ladies’ suit by setting aside judgment and decree of Trial Court. High Court declined interference in circumstances. Christian Marriage s Act, 1872, was clear that individuals falling under S5(1) & (2) of the Act were not required to apply for a formal license from the HR&MA Department to solemnize court marriage on Saturday and Christian court marriage in Pakistan because under canon law, ordination itself conferred an inherent power to solemnize marriage s. it reflected this position in the Act.
