ABDUL GHAFOOR vs MEHMOOD AHMAD alias ASGHAR and others
This petition for leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had modified the decrees of two lower courts regarding maintenance allowance. The respondents had filed a suit for maintenance for two children, which was partially decreed by the Family Court, granting maintenance from the date of the suit's institution rather than the earlier date requested. While the petitioner appealed unsuccessfully to the District Judge, the High Court, in a constitutional petition, modified the decree to grant maintenance from the earlier date of January 1999. The petitioner contended that the High Court erred in granting this relief because the respondents had not filed an appeal against the initial refusal of that period. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner was legally obligated to maintain his children during the disputed period regardless of the procedural omission. Consequently, the Court found no illegality in the High Court's decision, emphasizing that the grant of maintenance was just and equitable. The petition was dismissed, and leave to appeal was refused, affirming the High Court's exercise of discretion.
- Can a High Court modify a maintenance decree in a constitutional petition to grant relief from an earlier date even if the respondent did not file a formal appeal against the trial court's refusal of that period?
- Is a father legally obligated to provide maintenance for his children for the period preceding the institution of a maintenance suit?
- Article 185, Constitution of Pakistan 1973
ORDER
' MUNIR A. SHEIKH, J.--- This petition is directed against the judgment dated 4-7-2001 passed by Lahore High Court, Lahore, through which petition filed by the petitioner against the judgments of the two Courts below in a suit filed by respondent for the recovery of maintenance allowance of the two children has been dismissed with the modification of the judgments of the Courts below by granting maintenance allowance from January, 1999 instead of July, 1999 to one of the children.
2. The respondents filed a suit on 29-74999 before Judge, Family Court, Okara, for recovery of maintenance allowance for two children i.e, son and daughter at the rate of Rs,3,000 p.m. Per child from January, 1999. It was contested by the petitioner. The learned Judge, Family Court through judgment dated 27-5-2000 decreed the suit and granted maintenance allowance of each child at the rate of Rs,1,500 p.m. From July, 1999, i.e, the date of institution of this suit and not from 1st January, 1999 as prayed for.
3. The petitioner filed appeal before the learned District Judge, Okara which was dismissed on 27- 9-2000 against which Constitutional petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed through the impugned judgment dated 4-7-2001 with the modification as observed above of the judgment to grant maintenance allowance from January, 1999.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the respondent did not file any appeal for her suit praying for grant of maintenance allowance from January, 1999 shall be deemed to have been dismissed and if she was feeling aggrieved, she should have filed appeal to that extent and prayed for granting of maintenance allowance for the said period of six months also as such the learned Judge of the High Court in the Constitutional petition should not have modified the judgment. The grant of maintenance allowance from January, 1999 cannot be objected to by the petitioner as he was otherwise bound to maintain her daughter during the said period of six months back. We are not inclined to interfere in the impugned judgment in exercise, of discretion vested in this Court under Article 185 of the Constitution, which is just and equitable.
7. As to the merits of the case, no illegality has been committed by the Courts below while granting maintenance allowance of the two children of the petitioner at the rate of Rs,1,500 p.m. Each
8. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merits in this petition, which is accordingly dismissed and leave refused.
Cited by 2 cases
- Syed Ahmad Sher vs Addl. District Judge, etc 2022 LHC 3000, 2022 PLD Lahore 715
- Mst. Shamim Akhtar, etc vs Anwar Ali and others 2015 C.L.R. 74