Specifically stipulated in clause 20 of the Nikahnama.

After solemnization of Nikah respondent became legally wedded wife of the petitioner, therefore, he was bound to maintain her irrespective of the fact that marriage was consummated or not and particularly when a specific stipulation was made in the Nikahnama. Reliance is placed on case reported as Mst. Shamim Akhtar ..Vs.. Additional District Judge, Sialkot and another (1991 CLC 1142) wherein it has been laid down as under:-

 “There is no dispute between the parties that the Nikah was solemnized on 16 th June, 1985 at which time it was agreed that the respondent shall pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.300 per month, to his wife. It is so specifically stipulated in clause 20 of the Nikahnama. This stipulation was not made dependent upon the performance of Rukhsati nor was any such condition attached. In the written statement filed by respondent No.2, there was no averment that despite demand made by him, the wife had refused to perform her marital obligations or to live with him. That being so, the Additional District Judge was clearly in error in setting aside the decree  by holding that as Rukhsati had not taken place, the petitioner was not entitled to any maintenance.” 

Both the learned courts below were thus fully justified in holding that the petitioner was bound to pay maintenance allowance to respondent No.1 during subsistence of Nikah and no exception can be taken therefrom.  

Part of Judgment : 

THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE

WP- Family Law
30974-14

2015 LHC 8948