Maintenance Cases

Citation Name: PLJ 2009 Lahore High Court 749
Appelant Side: SHUMAILA MUSHTAQ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, NAROWAL and another
Judge Name: Ali Akbar Qureshi
Judgment Result:?
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----art. 199--constitutional petition--offer on oath on holy qur'an--suit for recovery of dowry article and maintenance allowance was decreed--entitlement of recovery amount in lieu of dowry articles as maintenance for iddit period--appeal was decided on the ground on oath--validity--an offer on oath on the holy quran was given by respondent and the same was refused--held: such offer cannot be made a ground to dismiss the claim of the petitioner--petition was allowed.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2009 Sh.C-AJ&K 20
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD SHAFAAT
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: Mst. RIFFAT SHAHEEN
Judge Name: Iftikhar Hussain Butt
Judgment Result:Appeal dismissed
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----s. 286--dower as compensation--decree of dower amounting rupees one lac was passed--assailed--suit for recovery of dower that at the time of nikah ceremony, the dower was fixed rupees one lac but with mala-fide intention rupees twenty-five were incorporated in nikahnama--agreement deed was executed that in case of separation, appellant will pay compensation as dower, and maintenance allowance to minor--validity--an amount of dower can be fixed even after the marriage and can also be increased--dower is payable to the wife even it has not been specified at the time of `nikah'--held: impugned decision for recovery of dower does not smack of any illegality--family court has appreciated and appraised the evidence and no ground for interference in the impugned decision has been made out--appeal was dismissed

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2009 Lahore High Court 520
Appelant Side: SABIR HUSSAIN
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: NUSRAT BIBI
Judge Name: Ali Hassan Rizvi
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----s. 12--constitution of pakistan 1973, art. 199--suit for recovery of dower and maintenance allowance--judgments of family court and appellate court--constitutional petition--held: marriage between the spouses still existed--claim of the wife was that petitioner/husband had given her 100 kanal land, as dower out of which 50 kanal was got mutated in her favour at the time of nikah--petitioner never alleged as to how the entry in nikahnama was fictitiously made, after nikah--there was no legal justification to deny the dower settled and maintenance claimed--appellate court was final court of fact--no misreading or non-reading of evidence found--petition dismissed in limine

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2009 Lahore High Court 531
Appelant Side: ZAFAR ALI KHAN
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE
Judge Name: S. Ali Hassan Rizvi
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----art. 199--constitutional petition--suit for recovery of maintenance allowance--family court enhanced the maintenance allowance--appreciation of evidence--modified the decree to extent of quantum of maintenance allowance and was granted decree at rate of rs. 6000/- per month--petitioner was a qualified doctor and having two wives--petitioner had entered into marriage after divorce of respondent--validity--evidence of the petitioner was not believable that he was getting only rs. 7000/- as salary while maintaining two families--rate of maintenance allowance enhanced in appeal cannot be said to be beyond his means or exorbitant--bleak sources or means of income of a husband or father was hardly a valid ground in context of maintenance, so as to justify interference in finding recorded by courts of fact--no case was made out for interference in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction of high court

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2009 Lahore High Court 556
Appelant Side: Mst. SAMINA AFZAAL and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ZAFAR ULLAH TARAR, ADDL. DISTT. JUDGE, LAHORE
Judge Name: S. Ali Hassan Rizvi
Judgment Result:Petition accepted
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----s. 14--constitution of pakistan, 1973--art. 199--constitutional petition--no appeal lay against the order passed by family court directing payment of interim maintenance allowance--suit for recovery of maintenance--direction for payment--respondent did not pay single penny and preferred an appeal--validity--expression "decision"--the word decision will have to be read ejusdem generis with expression decree--held: no appeal lay against any interim order passed by family court and that only final order would be covered by the word decision--appeal before distt. judge filed against the order of family court directing interim maintenance was not competent--impugned order had no legal efficacy--petition was accepted

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2008 Lahore High Court 757
Appelant Side: MASOOD SADIQ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: Mst. SHAZIA and 3 others
Judge Name: Zafar Iqbal Chaudhry
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----s. 36--constitution of pakistan, 1973--art. 199--suit for recovery of maintenance allowance--interim order for maintenance allowance of rs. 1000/- was passed--extent of maintenance allowance which was reduced from rs. 1000/- to rs. 800/- each--provisions of law--applicability--grant of maintenance (alimony)to wife is squarely covered under christian divorce act, but as far as maintenance of minor pending decision of the proceedings--held: no specific provision covers the aspect of the matter and in absence of any specific provision for grant of maintenance to minor in the christian divorce act--provisions of family courts act, 1964 being not in-conflict with the provisions of christian divorce act, shall be applicable as there is nothing in the west pakistan family courts act, by which it can be said to be inapplicable to christian.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2008 Lahore High Court 862
Appelant Side: Mst. NAUREEN TAHIRA and 2 others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, MANDI BAHAUDDIN and another
Judge Name: Muhammad Muzammal khan
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----s. 5 (amended ordinance lv of 2000)--constitution of pakistan, 1973, art. 199--jurisdiction--constitutional petition--petitioner filed two distinct suits, one for recovery of maintenance allowance for her children and recovery of dowry articles--second suit was separately dealt--appellate court modified the decree--assailed order--voluntarily relinquishment--marginal evidence--question of recovery mentioned in nikahnama could be resolved by family court--validity--suit in-question cannot be considered as part of dower amount--nikahnama was not recoverable through family court established under muslim family courts act, yet such findings were given being oblivious of amendment introduced in schedule part-i conferring jurisdiction to family court for recovery of personal property and belongings of a wife--question of recovery mentioned in nikahnama could be resolved by family court--held: impugned appellate judgment revealed that controversy was correctly put to rest and net result drawn was not tainted with any factual illegality/error--lawful decision within abmit of conferred jurisdiction cannot be substituted on present petition which being devoid of any merit is dismissed.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2008 Lahore High Court 712
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD ARIF
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: Mst. SHAHEEN AKHTAR and 2 others
Judge Name: Khurshid Anwar Bhinder
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----o.xvii, r. 3--constitution of pakistan, 1973, art. 199--constitutional petition--question of law and facts--suit for recovery of maintenance allowance--petitioners' right of cross examination has been struck off by the trial court--petitioner filed an application for the recalling of the order which too was dismissed--petitioner called in question two orders passed by trial court--held, petitioner was afforded a number of opportunities for cross-examining the witnesses of the respondents and for producing his evidence but he failed to cross examine the witnesses of the respondents and producing his evidence, as such, the trial court had left with no option but to struck off the right of the petitioner for cross examining the witnesses of the respondents and to close his evidence--impugned orders passed by trial court are just, fair and calls for no interference by high court in its constitutional jurisdiction.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Lahore High Court 887
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD ZAMAN
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: FAUZIA BIBI and another
Judge Name: Muhammad Muzammal Khan
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----art. 199--west pakistan muslim family courts act, 1964, s. 9--suit for recovery of articles and maintenance allowance--closure of right of filing written statement--opportunities within 20 days--no doubt the suit filed by the respondent was a family suit and required expedition disposal but petitioner/defendant should have been given fair opportunity of defending the same by filing written statement, which was not provided in the case in hand.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Quetta High Court 9
Appelant Side: MUJTABA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: RAZIA and 2 others
Judge Name: Raja Fayyaz Ahmed, C.J., and Akhtar Zaman Malghani, J.
Judgment Result:Order accordingly
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----ss. 5 & 9--sched.--constitution of pakistan (1973), art. 199--suit for dissolution of marriage, recovery of dower amount, maintenance allowance and for the custody of the minors against the petitioner--ex parte decree was passed against the petitioner--defendant, at the time of passing of ex parte decree, was in judicial lock up--even in civil proceedings, if an order, be it a final or interlocutory, adverse to interest of any party concerning his rights in personam or in rem had been passed and if such person be in jail, he had to be informed accordingly, through the superintendent of jail--no such information, was conveyed to defendant (petitioner) in respect of decree, therefore, it could not be assumed, in absence of other material, that he had active knowledge of the ex-parte decree passed against him nor even application submitted before appellate court seeking condonation of delay in appeal beyond prescribed period of limitation was contested by the plaintiff by filing counter affidavit--such aspect of the case germane to question of limitation was not attended to by the appellate court nor validity or legality of impugned decree based upon proceedings ordered to be taken ex parte, were taken into consideration by appellate court, which consequently rendered its judgment and decree as not sustainable--order passed by the family court whereby the defendant was ordered to be proceeded ex parte was a nullity in eye of law, void and without jurisdiction--subsequent proceedings taken in case and ex parte decree passed in consequence thereof also were without any legal effect and that being so, made the question of limitation pertaining to the filing of appeal as worthless and to no credence--high court, set aside the said orders declaring same to be of no legal effect--suit instituted by plaintiff as ordered to be expeditiously decided as provided by law after hearing the parties--defendant, subject to the final decision by the family court, was directed to deposit with the family court interim maintenance at the rate of rs. 1200 per month w.e.f. the specified date for the three minors/daughters of the spouses presently in the custody of their mother (plaintiff).
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Lahore High Court 1260
Appelant Side: ABDULLAH
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: NAILA ASLAM and 3 others
Judge Name: Muhammad Muzammal Khan
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----ss. 5 & 7--muslim family law ordinance, (viii of 1961), s. 9--constitution of pakistan, 1973, art. 199--suit for granting of maintenance allowance and recovery of dower amount as per agreement--suit decreed and appeal was dismissed--assailed--enhancement of dower amount--husband did not refuse his liability to pay maintenance allowance awarded to wife and minor son--wife could not prove enhancement of dower amount and agreement by her was forged--wife claimed in plaint, not only produced agreement executed by husband enhancing the dower amount but also examined its marginal witnesses--denial of execution by the petitioner appeared to be after thought and was put forth just to avoid liability to pay enhanced dower amount--no effort on his behalf was ever made for comparison of signature from handwriting expert by moving application before courts below which negatively reflects on his stance in written statement--held: dower amount was fixed in nikahnama but same under islamic law could have been enhanced by husband at any time during subsistence of marriage--lawful decision within jurisdiction could not be substituted on petition and dismissed.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for recovery of maintenance allowance
Citation Name: PLJ 2003 Peshawar High Court 132
Appelant Side: Mst. JAMILA BANO
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: MIRZA MUHAMMAD and 2 others
Judge Name: MALIK HAMID SAEED AND SHAH JEHAN KHAN,
Judgment Result:Orders accordingly
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
-art-199~recovery of minor children-learned courts below not only have deprived real mother from custody of minor children on sole ground of poverty but on the other hand have misread evidence wherein it is categorically stated that children in possession of mother are happy and receiving proper education-though minors are studying in government school in 7th class and 4th class respectively but it is also in evidence that father of children is a crane operator in tarbela dam project, who in his meagre pay without any other source of income could not be expected to impart education to children in some high standard educational institutions-hence education of minor children in custody of mother is property going on according to her resources and maintenance allowance which she received from husband for them-moreover, father of minor children has contracted two other marriages and in presence of two step mothers in same house, welfare of minors cannot be stated to be safe than in custody of her real mother-law gives custody of a child which is too young to be independent of own's help in feeding, clothing and like, for boy limit is fixed at 7 years, but right of custody of father is required to be instituted solely for benefit of minor and in absence to that right cannot be conferred on father at all costs-mother is best guardian for her minor children unless it is proved that she has married a man who is not closely related to minor, or she lives a life of open immorality or her occupation by such as to make it difficult for her to look after child properly-all above factors goes in favour of mother-neither she has contracted marriage nor her character and occupation is such that i custody of minors could be refused to her-custody of minors given to mother.