2004 PLP 637 (CLC)

Brief facts of this case are that respondents Nos. 1 and 2 (wife and minor) filed a suit for recovery of maintenance allowance alongwith the expenses of delivery on the birth of respondent No.2. Suit was resisted. The learned family Judge framed the preliminary issues and a direction in respect of the interim maintenance allowance was made to the petitioner and as a result for non-deposit of maintenance allowance, the defence of the petitioner was struck off and the suit of the respondents was decreed in their favour on 19-4-2003. The learned Family Court Judge awarded Rs.800 per month maintenance allowance to respondent No.1 from 12-1-2000 till the date of the decree and Rs.1,000 per month since the birth of respondent No.2 till his majority with further increase 10% per annum. The delivery expenses of Rs.35,000 of the birth of respondent No.2 was also awarded. The petitioner filed an appeal against the said judgment and decree. Respondents Nos.1 and 2 filed an application under section 14(2)(c) of Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1964 for the rejection of the appeal before the learned Additional District Judge, Lahore, on the ground that the appeal is incompetent. The said application was accepted and the appeal in respect to the award of maintenance allowance was dismissed and to the extent of delivery expenses is pending adjudication.

2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner are that the order dismissing the appeal is against law and facts of the case and there is no bar under section 14(2)(c) of Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1964, to file an appeal against the period of maintenance allowance the amount of Rs.1,000 and the learned Appellate Court has ignored the same. He further argued that the petitioner has been condemned unheard.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record carefully.

4. The sole ground agitated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the bar of filing an appeal under section 14(2)(c) of Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1964, is just to the period of maintenance allowance is not convincing at all. The provisions of section 14(2)(c) of Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 1964, is reproduced as under:-- section

14. No appeal shall lie from a decree passed by a Family Court. (a)

(b)

(c) for maintenance of Rs.1,000 or less per month.

5. The Legislature has clearly shown its intention that the right of appeal even being substantive is barred. The purpose is to frustrate the appeal in respect of the award of maintenance allowance to the extent of Rs.1,000 which was previously Rs.500 and enhanced to Rs.1,000 subsequently. Moreover, delivery expenses was also a part and parcel of the suit for maintenance which is still pending before the learned Family Court Judge, therefore, finding no substance in the instant petition. This writ petition is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./R-271/L Petition dismissed.