AMNA FAYYAZ vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (WEST) ISLAMABAD S — 2026 CLC 673 ISLAMABAD

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

AMNA FAYYAZ VS ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (WEST) ISLAMABAD S.5, Sched.---Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908), O.I, R.10(2)---Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance of minor children---Inability of father to pay maintenance---Paternal grandfather of minors, responsibility of---Scope---Where father is incapable of maintaining the minor children then such responsibility extends to the grandfather---Welfare of minor was of paramount importance in such matters---The petitioner (wife) filed a writ petition challenging the judgment passed by District Court which had allowed appeals filed by respondent No. 3 (paternal grandfather) and respondent No.4 (father) and set aside the family court's order impleading the paternal grandfather as a defendant in a suit for recovery of maintenance for the petitioner's two minor daughters---Respondent No. 4 (father) claimed financial incapacity, leading the petitioner to seek impleadment of Respondent No. 3 (paternal grandfather), awealthy businessman with properties in multiple countries---Family court allowed this application, but the appellate court reversed the family court's decision---Pivotal question for consideration by the High Court was as to "Whether the paternal grandfather could be impleaded as a necessary party in the suit for recovery of maintenance allowance when the father was financially incapable and the grandfather possessed sufficient means?"---Held: Documentary evidence submitted by the petitioner regarding financial status of respondent No.3 showed that he possessed substantial wealth, including multiple properties and businesses in different countries---His financial standing remained undisputed, making it apparent that he had the means to contribute to the maintenance of his grandchildren---High Court acknowledged the hardships faced by respondent No.4 (father), however, it was crucial to consider that the minor children's right to maintenance should not be compromised due to the father's financial incapacity---The law, in such instances, allowed for the financial responsibility to be extended to the grandfather---Where father was unable to provide the maintenance, the grandfather must step in---Therefore, respondent No.3 being the grandfather of the minors was anecessary party in the maintenance proceedings---If respondent No.3 (paternal grandfather) was made a defendant in the case concerning the maintenance of the minors, no prejudice would be caused to him, instead, a fair opportunity could be afforded to him to establish his financial capacity and whether he was capable of maintaining the minor children and rebut the stance taken by the petitioner through cogent and reliable evidence before the family court---Furthermore, if a decree of maintenance was passed against respondent No.4 (father) and he failed to pay the maintenance, then it might have been necessary to ultimately implead respondent No.3 (paternal grandfather) as a party and file a fresh suit for maintenance, which might have resulted in unnecessary complications and delays, ultimately causing hardship to the minors---Impugned judgment of the appellate court was set-aside and order of family court impleading respondent No.3 (paternal grandfather) as a party in the suit was upheld---Present Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances.

AMNA FAYYAZ vs ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE (WEST) ISLAMABAD S — 2026 CLC 673 ISLAMABAD

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2026 CLC