LAHORE: The Lahore High Court has ruled that a judgment debtor cannot insist on paying the alternate monetary value of dowry articles in place of returning the actual items, holding that the right of choice rests exclusively with the decree-holder.

Justice Anwaar Hussain announced the judgment deciding a petition of a woman, Afzal Bibi, challenging the decision of a lower court.

The petitioner had obtained a decree from the family court on Nov 20, 2024, entitling her to recover her dowry articles or alternatively their assessed value of Rs200,000. The decree attained finality as it was not challenged further.

During execution proceedings, counsel for the respondent husband appeared before the executing court and stated that the dowry articles were available and could be collected by the petitioner.

LHC overturns lower court order, fines man for withholding dowry articles

Acting on this assurance, the court appointed a bailiff upon payment of Rs10,000, which the petitioner woman deposited. However, when the bailiff visited the respondent’s residence, he was obstructed, and even inspection of the dowry articles was refused.

Subsequently, the respondent deposited Rs70,000 in the court, expressing his intention to satisfy the decree by paying the alternate value instead of returning the articles. The executing court permitted this course and the order was upheld in revision.

LHC Justice Hussain framed the central issue as whether, under a decree granting dowry articles “or in the alternative” their value, the judgment debtor can refuse to return the articles and insist on paying the decreed amount and whether the executing court can compel the decree-holder to accept such substitution.

The judge’s ruling answered the question in the negative, holding that once a decree grants recovery of specific dowry articles or their assessed value, the option lies solely with the decree-holder.

It said a judgment debtor who has acknowledged availability of the articles cannot later obstruct recovery and convert the decree into a monetary liability at his convenience.

Justice Hussain observed that decrees passed under the Family Courts Act, 1964 are enforceable commands of law and must be executed effectively and promptly.

He observed that dowry articles are not merely items of property but belongings entrusted at the time of marriage, often carrying both financial and personal significance.

Expressing satisfaction with the decree through payment of Rs200,000, the LHC judge held that the respondent’s conduct in first offering return of the articles and then obstructing execution amounted to abuse of process.

The judge ordered the respondent to deposit the remaining Rs130,000 of the decree-amount along with Rs100,000 as special cost and refund Rs10,000 bailiff fee, within 15 days before the executing court.

In case of non-compliance, the executing court has been authorised to initiate coercive measures, including attachment of property, to recover the outstanding amounts, the ruling concludes.

Published in Dawn, February 27th, 2026