Nasra begam v.

Rizwan Ali Ali AIR 1980 All 118

Facts of the Case:

Smt. Nasra Begum, the plaintiff, got married to defendant Rijwan Ali in Bareilly on October 20, 1963.

The dower amount payable to the plaintiff was fixed at Rs. 50,000, with Rs. 25,000 as the prompt
dower and the rest as deferred dower.

After the marriage, the plaintiff and defendant lived in Barabanki, and they had a son together.

Relations between the plaintiff and her husband strained, and the plaintiff demanded payment of
her prompt dower.

The defendant refused to pay and turned her out of the house.

The plaintiff filed suit no. 6 of 1974 in the Court of Civil Judge, Bareilly, seeking Rs. 25,000 as her
prompt dower and possession of certain ornaments.

The defendant contested the suit, arguing that the court at Bareilly had no territorial jurisdiction to
try the case since the marriage was consummated in Barabanki, and the demand for dower was also
made there.

Issues:

Whether the court of Bareilly had territorial jurisdiction to try the suit filed by the plaintiff for the
recovery of her prompt dower?

Judgment:

The trial court ruled that the cause of action for a suit for prompt dower arises either at the place
where the marriage was consummated or at the place where prompt dower was demanded after
such consummation. Since the marriage was consummated at Barabanki, and the demand for
prompt dower was also made there, the court at Bareilly had no territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.

The trial court returned the plaintiff's plaint for presentation to the proper court.

Aggrieved by the trial court's decision, the plaintiff, Smt. Nasra Begum, appealed before a higher
court.

The higher court disagreed with the trial court's reasoning and held that the right to claim prompt
dower precedes cohabitation and comes into existence along with it under Mohammedan Law.
Therefore, the place where the marriage was performed (Bareilly) has territorial jurisdiction to try
the suit.

The higher court considered the agreement entered into at the time of marriage in Bareilly regarding
the dower amount and ruled that the Bareilly courts have territorial jurisdiction to try the suit.

The higher court allowed the appeal, set aside the trial court's order, and directed the Civil Judge
with jurisdiction to proceed and decide the case in accordance with the law.
The parties were directed to bear their own costs in this appeal.

In summary, the judgment allowed the appeal, stating that the court at Bareilly had territorial
jurisdiction to try the suit for prompt dower, contrary to the trial court's decision. The case will now
be heard and decided by the proper court in Bareilly.