| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2011 SLG 995 2011 SLD 995 2011 YLR 989 |
Lahore High Court
W.P. No. 22722 of 2010, decision Dated: 25-10-2010.
SYED AKHLAQ AHMAD, JUSTICE
Muhammad Asghar Nadeem for Petitioner.
W.P. No. 22722 of 2010, decision Dated: 25-10-2010.
SYED AKHLAQ AHMAD, JUSTICE
Muhammad Asghar Nadeem for Petitioner.
MUHAMMAD USMAN
VS
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, GUJRANWALA AND 4 OTHERS
Law: Family Courts Act, 1964
Section: 5, Schedule
Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973
Section: 199
West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S. 5 & Sched:---.---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199--- Constitutional petition---Suit for recovery of maintenance and dowry articles---Trial Court decreed the suit while appellate court dismissed the appeal of defendant---Validity---Courts below had decided the question of maintenance in accordance with law---Defendant took divergent stances as to his income and properties owned by him and could not point out any misreading or non-reading of material evidence warranting interference of High Court---Constitutional petition was dismissed. THIS ORDER PASSED BY: SYED AKHLAQ AHMED, J.- Through this constitutional petition Muhammad Usman petitioner/defendant has prayed this court to declare the judgment dated 8-6-2010 and 16-9-2010 passed by the Judge Family Court Gujranwala and the learned Addl. District Judge Gujranwala respectively to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect. 2. Facts giving rise to this petition are that Mst. Sumaira Bibi/respondent No.3/ plaintiff is the wife while Muhammad Usama aged about 10 years, Muhammad Talha aged about 8 years are the minor sons of Muhammad Usman petitioner/ defendant. On 27-10-2009, they filed suit for recovery of maintenance and of dowry articles as per list attached with the plaint or a sum of Rs.21,74,500 as its price in lieu thereof before the Judge Family Court Gujranwala demanding maintenance @ Rs.25,000 per head per month and past maintenance with the same rate w.e.f. 23-9-2009 with 10 % annual increase. The suit was resisted by the petitioner/defendant whereupon three issues were framed. Parties led their evidence and the learned Judge Family Court vide his judgment and decree dated 8-6-2010 allowed maintenance @ Rs.12,000 per head per month from the date of institution of the suit till majority with 10 % annual increase. Respondent No.3/plaintiff Sumaira Bibi was allowed maintenance @ Rs.12,000 per month from the date of institution of the suit till the expiry of period of Iddat. She was also held to be entitled to recover dowry articles mentioned in the list Exh.P-6 excluding Articles Nos.1 to 17 pertaining to gold ornaments or a suet of…
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