Law:

Section:

(a) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964) --------- ----------S. 5, Sched --------- Suits for recovery of maintenance allowance --------- Family Court fixed maintenance allowance for the minors at the rate of Rs. 8000/- per month for each child with increase of 30% per annum but Appellate Court modified the amount from Rs. 8000/- to Rs.5000/- and annual increase at the rate of 10% per annum --------- Validity --------- Appraisal of evidence, assessment of its evidentiary value, drawing of inference therefrom and to determine the amount of maintenance was the function of Family Court --------- Family Court had exclusive jurisdiction to decide such matters --------- High Court in exercise of its constitutional jurisdiction could not correct the error of facts committed by the subordinate court during the proceedings of family matters --------- Appellate Court had reduced the amount of monthly maintenance for the minor and such controversy must come to an end --------- Findings recorded by the Appellate Court were based on evidence and were also supported by reasoning --------- No material piece of evidence had been overlooked or misread by the Appellate Court --------- Appellate Court had correctly determined the maintenance amount --------- Impugned did not suffer from any jurisdictional infirmity --------- Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances. (b) Constitution of Pakistan --------- ----------Art.199 --------- Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court --------- Nature and scope --------- Powers of High Court in constitutional jurisdiction were not analogous to those of an Appellate Court --------- High Court under its constitutional jurisdiction could neither substitute finding of fact recorded by the court nor give its opinion with regard to adequacy or quality of evidence --------- Constitutional jurisdiction could only be exercised if lower court had exceeded its jurisdiction or acted without jurisdiction --------- Finding of fact recorded by the court having jurisdiction could not be disturbed merely on the ground that another view was possible on the same evidence unless such finding based on evidence was fanciful or arbitrary. THIS JUDGMENT…

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