Law: Family Courts Act, 1964

Section: 5

Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)--- ----S.5 & Sched.---Maintenance allowance, recovery of---Sham transaction involving immoveable property to avoid payment of maintenance allowance---Concurrent findings---Petitioner claimed to be owner of the property purchased by him against due consideration vide mutation in question from the owner against whom decree for recovery of maintenance had been passed by Family Court---Trial Court and Lower Appellate Court concurrently declared the mutation void for it was entered to avoid payment of maintenance allowance to respondents---Validity---Judgment debtor neglected to fulfill his obligations imposed upon him through decree passed by Family Court and to pay maintenance allowance to minors---Petitioner appeared before Family Court in response to the application seeking restraining order against petitioner from alienating the property who within a period of 3 to 4 months alienated the property through mutation to his real brother---Such transfer of property reflected that mutation was nothing but a sham transaction to avoid maintenance, which was duty of judgment debtor---High Court declined to interfere in the order passed by two Courts below who concurrently reached to the conclusion that the only purpose of the mutation was to avoid payment under decree passed by Family Court---Petitioner failed to point out any illegality or material irregularity in orders passed by two Courts below---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. Muhammad Yaar v. Additional District Judge, Depalpur and others 2020 YLR 1266 and Amjad Iqbal v. Mst. Nida Sohail and others 2015 SCMR 128 rel. JUDGMENT SULTAN TANVIR AHMAD, JUSTICE:---.--- Through this Constitution petition, filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 26.09.2022 passed by learned Additional District Judge Gojra, whereby, the order dated 16.06.2022 of the learned Judge Family Court, Gojra, has been upheld. 2. Brief facts of the case are that suit of respondents Nos.3 to 5 for recovery of maintenance etc. was decreed on 11.01.2021 against respondent No.6 (the…

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