Amount of maintenance is exorbitant and petitioner is unable to pay the said amount as the same has been fixed without considering the financial position of the petitioner.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that both the Courts below failed to appreciate the evidence adduced by the petitioner as respondent No.3 was unable to prove her case as her oral statement was set of contradictions. No such list of articles of Barri as relied upon by respondent No.3 was prepared or handed over to the petitioner at the time of Rukhsati. It is further complained that both the Courts below have failed to appreciate the evidence of the parties in its true perspective and reached to the conclusion not warranted by law. The findings of both the Courts below are not based on sound appreciation of facts, so he prayed for setting aside the impugned judgments and decrees of both the Courts below to the extent of dowry articles. Further submits that amount of maintenance is exorbitant and petitioner is unable to pay the said amount as the same has been fixed without considering the financial position of the petitioner. The learned counsel while relying upon Umar Farooq v. Mehnaz Iftikhar etc. (NLR 2007 Civil 105), Mst. Allah Rakhi v. Tanvir Iqbal and others (2004 SCMR 1739), Muhammad Akram v. Mst. Hajra Bibi and 2 others (PLJ 2008 Lahore 147) and Abdullah v. Mst. Zubaida Begum and others 1998 CLC 1631 (Lahore) prayed for setting aside of impugned judgments and decrees as well as order dated 07.04.2009. 

 Part of Judgment : 

IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT

WP- Family Law
19091-09

2014 LHC 5328