MUHAMMAD KASHIF vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE S — 2022 MLD 1995 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

MUHAMMAD KASHIF VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE S.5, Sched---Quantum of maintenance for minor---Pervious maintenance of wife---Summoning of witness---Wife and minor (respondents) filed suit for recovery of maintenance allowance, dowry articles, car and gold ornaments against husband/father/petitioner before Family Court---Petitioner appeared and contested the suit by filing written statement ---Family Court decreed the suit---Both parties preferred appeals before Appellate Court which was dismissed----Held, that to the extent of maintenance allowance of the minor, petitioner/father was religiously, legally and morally bound to maintain his child, so far as, quantum of maintenance allowance for minor was concerned, wife (respondent) had claimed that petitioner was serving as Major in the Army and received Rs,150,000/- salary ,therefore could easily pay Rs. 35,000/- per month maintenance to the minor where as petitioner took the stance that he had to pay mess bill and other expenses worth Rs.50,000/- and also had other dependents----Minor was school going girl and her expenses would definitely increase in future---Keeping in views the facts and circumstances of the case, status of the parties and evidence produced during the trial, Family Court rightly fixed the quantum of maintenance allowance with 10% annual increase---Wife/respondent had claimed her pervious maintenance allowance since October 2016 but was unable to establish the fact when, where, in whose presence and for what reason, she was forcibly expelled by petitioner from his house---Wife had also not specifically alleged that she had been tortured by the petitioner---When the lady was not residing with the petitioner and not performing her matrimonial obligations, petitioner was not under obligation to maintain respondent (wife) for the said period---Wife had claimed that the car and 12 tolas gold ornaments given as dowry articles were not returned by the petitioner and were still in petitioner's possession where as petitioner had denied said fact---During pendency of suit, wife (respondent) filed an application for recording evidence of real mother of the petitioner which was allowed and mother of petitioner was summoned---Petitioner's mother deposed against the petitioner and there was no reason to disbelieve the real mother who had deposed against her own son/petitioner---Special power of attorney of petitioner did not opt to cross-examine the petitioner's mother meaning thereby her statement was admitted by the special attorney---Neither any independent evidence was brought on record to prove that petitioner's mother had deposed against petitioner due to some enmity nor any evidence was produced that her statement was not the correct picture---Even petitioner himself had not appeared in the witness box whereas petitioner's special attorney appeared who was neither having full information about the event of marriage and nor about proceedings of the Court----Petitioner's mother was put questions by the Court, she replied to them, which showed that she was making independent statement and her statement could not be said to be under the influence of any body or within the meaning of tutored statement ---Even otherwise, the response/behaviour of petitioner to the application for summoning the petitioner's mother revealed that statement of the petitioner's mother was a correct picture---Petition was dismissed, in circumstances.

MUHAMMAD KASHIF vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE S — 2022 MLD 1995 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 MLD