2024 C L C 1580
[Lahore (Rawalpindi Bench)]
Before Jawad Hassan, J
Syed ZAIN MUNTAZAR MEHDI----Petitioner
Versus
Mst. SARA NAQVI and others----Respondents
Writ Petition No.370 of 2024, heard on 21st March, 2024.
(a) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---
----S.5, Sched.----Maintenance allowance to wife and children, providing of---Obligation of husband/father---Scope---Husband is under legal, moral and religious obligation to maintain his legally wedded wife---Section 272 of Mohammdan Law provides obligation of a husband to maintain his wife with certain conditions---Section 278 of Mohammdan Law postulates that if a husband refuses to maintain his wife, she may sue for maintenance---Hence, it is the obligation of husband to pay Nafqa or maintenance, if construed in accordance with the principles as laid down in "HIDAYA" translated by Charles Hamilton in Chapter XV such as "Nafqa", in the language of law, signifies all those things which are necessary to support life, such as food, clothes and lodging---In the present case, the Courts below had held the petitioner (husband) under obligation to pay maintenance allowance of the respondent/wife, which by no means was in deviation to law and Sharia---Likewise, a father is under legal, moral and religious obligation to maintain his children till the age specified by law/sharia and such obligation originates from esteemed dictates of Holy Quran---Father's obligation to maintain his children has repeatedly been recognized and emphasized.
Humayun Hassan v. Arslan Humayun and another PLD 2013 SC 557 and Syeda Farhat Jahan v. Syed Iqbal Hussain Rizvi and another 2010 YLR 3275 ref.
(b) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---
----S.5, Sched.---Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance---Maintenance allowance of the minors, quantum of---Scope---Father is obligated to maintain his children and a reasonable standard must be assumed for determining quantum of their maintenance allowance---Court while considering the quantum of maintenance will take into consideration the fundamentals of the minors education, status, general expenses---Court must also take into consideration reasonable probability of obtaining education and the ability to take care of the minors in a stable, safe and healthy environment---Without due consideration of all said factors, the Court cannot conclude positively the quantum of maintenance---There is no hard and fast formula for determining quantum of maintenance and the main consideration for the Court is the ability of the father to maintain the minors---Thus, merely stating that he is short of resources will not discharge him of his obligation---Basic objective for determining maintenance is to ensure that in all probability the minors are maintained by the father in a dignified manner with reasonable comfort and that the mother of the child is not left to bear the burden of taking care of the minors---Quantum of maintenance requires due consideration of all factors on the basis of which the court can determine the actual need of the minor---In said regard, it is important for the court to keep in consideration the expenses incurred or likely to be incurred on the minors---For the purpose of maintenance it is the obligation of the father to fulfill needs of his kids.
Nazia Bibi and others v. Additional District Judge, Ferozewala and others PLD 2018 Lah. 916 ref.
(c) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---
----S.5, Sched.---Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance---Maintenance allowance of the minors---Financial status of the father---Proof---Notwithstanding the fact that the respondent (plaintiff/mother) was unable to procure and bring on record salary slip of the petitioner, he himself was obliged to bring on record reliable and trustworthy record/documents disclosing his monthly salary---Petitioner though had produced (got exhibited) in evidence his alleged salary slip, but said salary slip by no means qualified standards to attain trustworthy status for reliance on certain counts; one that it did not conform with minimum standards of wages, and second that it was a document handed out and produced by the petitioner himself, which from the face of it appeared to be a computer generated copy lacking any sort of verification on behalf of the petitioner's employer---To prove said document (salary slip), the petitioner could have easily adduced his bank statement of the salary account, transpiring exact deposits from his company on account of his salary; he could have also produced his employer or any other authorized official of the company in support of sanctity, truthfulness and genuine status of said document (salary slip)---Petitioner's employer or his authorized official, whilst appearing in witness box, could have brought on record bank and tax record to establish and prove remittances in the petitioner's salary account on head of his salary---However, the petitioner did not do the same and only produced said two documents (salary slip and salary account opening form) for proving his salary, which attempt fells short on account of no evidentiary value attached to both said documents---Though the provisions of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984 are not stricto sensu applicable to family matters, but exhibited salary slip was bereft of any strength and evidentiary value---If salary slip had been an official/attested/verified document, then situation would have been different, but genuine origination and sanctity of exhibited salary slip was not of required standards for being relied upon---In the circumstances, the Courts below had no option but to believe the evidence produced by the respondent (plaintiff / mother) regarding immediate necessities of claimants of maintenance allowance and fixing up same keeping in light the petitioner's obligations as well---No ground whatsoever was available to substitute the concurrent findings of courts below---Constitutional petition, being meritless, is dismissed, in circumstances.
Muhammad Asim and others v. Mst. Samro Begum and others PLD 2018 SC 819 ref.
Malik Aamir Saleem for Petitioner.
Ms. Farzana Aziz for Respondent No.1.
