The petitioner (grandfather) was never party to the suit.

There is no cavil that in terms of para 370 of Muhammadan Law by D.F Mulla's, a grandfather in certain circumstances is bound to maintain his grandchildren but obligation of the grandfather to maintain his grandchildren is hedged with certain conditions. In order to understand the matter in issue in better terms, para 370 of Muhammadan Law by D.F. Mulla's. Primarily it is the father who is bound to maintain his children, in case of son(s) until he (they) attain(s) the age of puberty and if there are daughters, till their marriage. In case, the father is poor and incapable of maintaining by his own, the mother would come into picture and if she is in easy circumstances, she would be bound to maintain her children in place of father. The liability of grandfather though starts when the father is poor and infirm and the mother is also not in a position to provide maintenance to her children but such liability of grandfather is dependent upon the fact that he should be in easy circumstances.

After having a glimpse of the survey of law on the subject, I am of the firm view that Family Court can never be helpless to get its decree executed. The process of execution cannot shift towards the grandfather merely on the ground that decree could not be satisfied against the father (judgment debtor). The Family Court cannot assume the role of spectator rather it can adopt the procedure contained in "CPC" for the execution of the decree.

Family
52429/20
Muhammad Siddique Vs Amna Bibi etc
Mr. Justice Mirza Viqas Rauf
10-05-2023
2023 LHC 2702