Order Sheet

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

 

Constitutional Petition No. S – 717 of 2017

 

Date

                                Order with signature of Judge

 

Fresh Case :

1. For orders on CMA No.3874/2017 (E/A) :

2. For orders on CMA No.3875/2017 (U/S 5 of Limitation Act, 1908) :

3. For orders on CMA No.3876/2017 (Stay) :

4. For hearing of Main Case :

 

07.03.2019 :      Malik Fayaz Ahmed, advocate for the petitioner.

…………

 

            Family Suit No.693/2010 filed by respondent No.3 Mst. Saba and minor Sahil for recovery of dower amount, dowry articles and maintenance was decreed against the petitioner by the learned Family Court vide impugned judgment and decree dated 31.10.2014 and 06.11.2014, respectively ; and, Family Appeal No.02/2015 filed by the petitioner against the above judgment and decree was dismissed by the learned appellate Court on 06.12.2016. Through this petition, the petitioner has impugned the concurrent findings of the learned trial and appellate Courts.

 

            While deciding issue No.1, it was held by the learned trial Court that an amount of Rs.3,000.00 per month shall be paid to respondent No.3 / plaintiff No.1 towards maintenance from the date of institution of the Suit till subsistence of her marriage with the petitioner. Regarding maintenance of the above named minor / plaintiff No.2, it was ordered that nominal amount of maintenance at the rate of Rs.2,000.00 per month granted earlier vide order dated 10.10.2011 shall continue till October 2014, and his future maintenance shall be paid at the rate of Rs.3,000.00 per month from November 2014 with 10% increase therein. In relation to the dower amount, it was held by the learned trial Court that since respondent No.3 had instituted a Suit for dissolution of the marriage by way of Khula, she was not entitled for the dower amount. Regarding dowry articles and/or the value thereof, it was observed by the learned trial Court that value thereof was not disclosed by respondent No.3. An amount of Rs.24,919.00 was granted to respondent No.3 towards medical expenses incurred by her on delivery.

 

             It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that he is pressing this petition only to the extent of maintenance granted to respondent No.3 and the minor, on the ground that respondent No.3 had left his house with the minor and they were not living with him. This ground has no substance as the petitioner, as husband of respondent No.3 and father of the minor, was legally and morally bound to maintain them whether they lived with him or not. Therefore, he is bound to pay maintenance of respondent No.3 as per the decree, however, till the completion of her iddat ; and, in relation to the minor till he attains the age of majority. With this observation, the petition and listed application are dismissed with no order as to costs.

 

    J U D G E