Case Details

Citation(s)
2012 SLG 669 2012 SLD 669 2012 CLC 1900
Lahore High Court
Writ Petition No.9621 of 2012, decision dated: 17-04-2012
SHAHID WAHEED, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

Mian SHOAIB AKRAM

VS

JUDGE FAMILY COURT and 4 others

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 14(3)

Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 14(3)

(a) West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)-------S. 14(3)---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional Jurisdiction---Scope---Constitutional petition did not lie against an interim order as under section 14(3) of the West Pakistan Family Court Act, 1964; no appeal or revision was competent against an interim order of the Family Court. (b) Constitution of Pakistan--- ----Art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Scope---Principles---When a statute did not provide for an appeal against an interlocutory order, then the same could not be challenged by the way of a Constitutional petition as allowing such an order to be impugned by way of a Constitutional petition would amount to negating the provisions of the statute which did not provide for an appeal against an interlocutory order. Syed Saghir Ahmed Naqvi v. Province of Sindh 1996 SCMR 1165 rel. (c) Interpretation of Statutes--- ----Court would not act in a manner by which the object of a statute was defeated and by which the same was rendered nugatory. (d) Administration of justice--- ----When no appeal was provided against an interlocutory order, then the same could only be challenged in the appeal to be filed against the final court . Muhammad Iftikhar Muhammad v. Javed Muhammad and 3 others 1998 SCMR 328 rel. Ch. Saeed Sabir, Advocate. ORDER SHAHID WAHEED, J.--- Petitioner, Mian Shoaib Akram, through this constitutional petition has called in question the validity and legality of an interim order dated 21-3-2012 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Lahore, whereby interim maintenance allowance of the minor respondents Nos.3 to 5 has been fixed in a suit instituted by respondent No.2 for very maintenance, dowry articles and dissolution of marriage. 2. Without touching merit of the case it is suffice to say that a constitutional petition does not lie against an…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492