Case ID |
39790922-9f3b-4e86-9dd8-2c6b06094100 |
Body |
View case body. Login to View |
Case Number |
Writ Petition No. 166 of 2022 |
Decision Date |
Feb 15, 2022 |
Hearing Date |
|
Decision |
The Lahore High Court dismissed the writ petition challenging the order of the learned Judge Family Court regarding the annual increase in maintenance under Section 17A(3) of the Family Courts Act, 1964. The court held that the provision for an automatic annual increase of ten percent in maintenance is mandatory and does not require a new decree to be issued. The increase is effective from the date of promulgation of the Punjab Family Courts (Amendment) Act, 2015. The court emphasized that the entitlement to maintenance is a fundamental right recognized by law and the Constitution, ensuring the dignity and well-being of the wife and children. It was determined that the Family Court's failure to prescribe the annual increase does not negate the statutory right to receive the increase automatically. The petitioner’s argument regarding the retrospective application of Section 17A(3) was found to be unfounded. Therefore, the court upheld the previous decisions regarding maintenance increase, reinforcing the law's intent to protect the rights of those entitled to maintenance. |
Summary |
This case revolves around the interpretation of Section 17A(3) of the Family Courts Act, 1964, which mandates an automatic annual increase in maintenance payments when not specified by the Family Court. The Lahore High Court addressed the petitioner's objections to a prior ruling that granted a ten percent increase in maintenance payments, effective from the date of enactment of the amendment to the Act. The court reaffirmed the principle that maintenance rights are fundamental, linking them to the rights to life and dignity as enshrined in the Constitution of Pakistan. The decision underscored the importance of ensuring that maintenance obligations keep pace with inflation and changing circumstances, thereby preventing undue hardship for those reliant on such support. The ruling emphasizes the court's role in safeguarding these rights and the necessity for Family Courts to adhere to statutory requirements for maintenance adjustments. The court's dismissal of the writ petition signifies a robust approach to enforcing maintenance rights, highlighting the law's protective measures for vulnerable parties in family law disputes. |
Court |
Lahore High Court
|
Entities Involved |
Not available
|
Judges |
RAHEEL KAMRAN, J,
KASHIF MAHMOOD
|
Lawyers |
Muhammad Mazhar Iqbal Chatta
|
Petitioners |
Raheel Kamran
|
Respondents |
Others,
Additional District Judge
|
Citations |
2022 SLD 2189,
2022 MLD 1762
|
Other Citations |
Tanveer Aziz v. Additional District Judge and others 2017 YLR 802,
Mst. Kaneez Akhtar v. Abdul Qadoos 2005 MLD 828,
Awal Ameer v. Additional District Judge and others 2013 MLD 1342,
Sharafat Ali v. Rehana Kauser and others 2010 MLD 1,
Khawaja Muhammad Sadiq v. Mst. Khalida Shafqat Khanam 1969 PCr.LJ 72,
Adnan Afzal v. Capt. Sher Afzal PLD 1969 SC 187,
Lt. Col. Nasir Malik v. Additional District Judge, Lahore 2016 SCMR 1821,
Badshah Gul Wazir v. Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa 2015 SCMR 43,
Halsburys Laws of England (4th Edn., Vol.44 at Para 921),
Vineeta Sharma v. Rakesh Sharma (2020) 9 SCC 1
|
Laws Involved |
Family Courts Act, 1964
|
Sections |
17A(3)
|