MUHAMMAD ABDUL LATEEF vs Sheikh MUHAMMAD IKRAM, ADDITIONAL
This petition for leave to appeal arises out of a judgment of the Lahore High Court upholding concurrent findings of lower forums regarding a suit for maintenance filed by minor children against their father. The core legal question concerned the liability of the father to provide maintenance to his minor children commensurate with his financial status following a divorce. The Supreme Court held that the petitioner, being an Executive Engineer PWD with a sound socio-economic status, was rightly ordered by the courts below to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs.3,000 per month for each child. The Court laid down the principle that it is the legal and moral duty of a father to maintain his children in a befitting manner, and he cannot escape this liability on flimsy grounds. Consequently, the petition was dismissed and leave to appeal was refused.
- Whether a father can escape his liability to maintain his minor children on flimsy grounds?
- Are concurrent findings of lower courts regarding the quantum of maintenance liable to be interfered with in constitutional jurisdiction?
- Does the socio-economic status of a father affect the determination of maintenance for his minor children?
'MAIN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, J.---This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 14-9-2001, whereby Writ Petition No,23750 of 2000 of the petitioner, was dismissed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 2-5-1976, petitioner was married to Mst. Kausar Malik. Out of wedlock four Children were born. Thereafter the petitioner divorced Mst. Kausar Malik on 31-12-1996 and contracted second marriage. Two Minor children of the petitioner namely Mubashara Latif and Muhammad Ahmad respondents No,3 and 4 filed a suit for maintenance against the petitioner on 1-10-1999 through their mother which was decreed by the learned Judge Family Court, Lahore vide his judgment, dated 10-4-2000 and maintenance at the rate of Rs,3000 per month each w,e,f, October, 1998 and 1-1-1997 and for future in favour of respondents Nos.3 and 4 respectively was awarded. The petitioner's appeal was dismissed by the Additional District Judge. Lahore vide his judgment, dated 12-9-2000 with the modification that Mubashara Latif was held entitled to maintenance till her marriage or till her custody if lawfully given to the petitioner while Muhammad Ahmad was entitled to receive the maintenance till the age of his majority. The petitioner being aggrieved of the aforesaid judgment filed writ petition No, 23750 of 2000 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore. A learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the same vide his judgment, dated 14-9-2001, impugned herein.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record of the case. The petitioner remained in the wedlock of Mst. Kausar Malik for about 20 years and out of such wedlock four children were born. After divorcing Mst. Kausar Malik. He contracted another marriage. The petitioner was admittedly Executive Engineer PWD, therefore, keeping in view his socio economic status,the two Courts of competent jurisdiction' had rightly fixed the maintenance of the two children at the rate Rs,3000 each per month w,e,f, 1-1-1997 and October, 1998. The learned Judge in Chambers of High Court on assessment of the evidence on record was justified to uphold the, concurrent findings of the two Courts below. It is legal and moral duty of the petitioner to maintain his children in a befitting manner and he cannot escape from his liability on flimsy grounds.
4. This petition being devoid of, any merit is dismissed and leave refused.
Cited by 1 case
- Najm-us-Saqib vs Minhaaj Saqib & 04 others 2021 IHC 84