4. Learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the learned Appellate Court has gone
beyond its jurisdiction while increasing
maintenance allowance of the respondents of its
own. He emphatically argued that respondents did
not challenge the findings of the learned Judge
Family Court either through appeal or crossobjections as such findings of the Family Court to
their extent had attained finality and the learned
Appellate Court was not vested with any power to
increase the quantum of maintenance allowance suo moto on appeal of the petitioner . Relies on Mateen
Haider ..Vs.. Additional District Judge, Lahore
and others (2005 SCMR 1683) and Muhammad
Nazir Khan ..Vs.. Ahmad and 2 others (2008
SCMR 521). Adds that the learned Appellate Court
did not consider the financial status of the petitioner
while increasing maintenance allowance of the
minors; that the petitioner has limited source of
income out of which he has to maintain his second
wife and children as well, therefore, he is unable to
pay the maintenance allowance to the respondents
at the enhanced rate fixed by the learned Appellate
Court. He next argued that there is no provision in
the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964
empowering the Family Court to pass a decree of
automatic annual increase; that the judgments and
decrees of both the courts below are harsh and
liable to be modified in accordance with the
financial status of the petitioner.
Part of Judgment of
Lahore High Court
WP- Family Law
1447-10
2015 LHC 8916
0 comments:
Post a Comment