1989 PLP 456 (SCMR)
ABDUL LATIF‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. SURAT KHATOON and another‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 456 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL LATIF‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. SURAT KHATOON and another‑‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 456 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 456 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 456 (SCMR) (ABDUL LATIF‑‑Petitioner Versus Mst. SURAT KHATOON and another‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Yawar Allah Wasaya Malik, Advocate Supreme Court and Maqbul A.Qadri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 4th June, 1988.,
Headnotes / Summary
1988. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 9‑2‑1988 in W.P. 3198 of 1987). Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961).‑ = . ‑‑‑S.9‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑Maintenance, award of‑ Consideration for minor child‑‑Order of Chairman, Arbitration Council allowing maintenance, challenged‑‑Contention that while fixing amount for wife, R Arbitration Council had allocated an amount for maintenance of parties' minor child also whereas it could award maintenance to wife alone, repelled‑‑While assessing rate of maintenance for wife, Council had taken into consideration the ,. burden which wife had to bear for maintaining minor child and no separate. amount for maintenance of minor child was fixed‑‑Impugned order not suffering from any infirmity‑‑Petition for leave to appeal dismissed by Supreme Court with observation that in the suit for maintenance pending before Family Court order of Arbitration Council will be taken into account whereby, while fixing the amount of maintenance for wife, her responsibility in looking after the minor child has also to be taken into account.
Judgment & Decree
SHAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal against the order dated 3‑2‑1987 which was passed by the Chairman of the Arbitration Council and was upheld in revision by the Deputy Commission and in writ jurisdiction by the High Court.
2. The only point raised in this petition is that while fixing the amount of maintenance for the wife, the Arbitration Council has allocated an amount for the maintenance of the parties' minor child also. It is contended that the Arbitration Council could award maintenance to the wife alone.
3. It is to be noticed that in its order the Arbitration Council has not fixed any separate amount for maintenance of the minor child. However, while assessing the rate of maintenance for the wife it has taken into account the burden which she had to bear for maintaining the minor daughter also. In the circumstances, infirmity. In any event, think that the we are informed that separate Council suit for maintenance is pending before a Family Court. We hope that while deciding the suit, the Family Court would also take into account the order of the Arbitration Council whereby while fixing the amount of maintenance for the wife, her responsibility in looking after the daughter has also to be taken into account. With these observations the petition is dismissed. M.I./A‑330/S Petition dismissed.