In which of the following cases, the court held that “Dower is a sale-price of women”?

In Saburannessa v. Sabdu Sheikh, AIR 1934 Cal 693 (referred to as Subrunnissan’s case), the Calcutta High Court compared a Muslim marriage to a contract of sale in which the wife is the property and the dower (mahr) is the sale-price or consideration. By contrast, in Abdul Kadir v. Salima (1886) ILR 8 All 149, Justice Mahmood emphasized that dower is an obligation imposed by law on the husband as a mark of respect for the wife rather than a literal purchase price (using the sale analogy only to illustrate contractual remedies). Hamira Bibi v. Zubaida Bibi (1916) concerned a widow's right to retain possession of her husband's estate in lieu of unpaid dower, and Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985) dealt with the right of a divorced Muslim woman to maintenance.