09/04/2022
*2021 M L D 337*
Following are the principles for fixation of interim maintenance:
i. Financial status of father shall be kept in view, which should be based upon salary slips, bank statements, income tax record, and business income reflected on record or through any other documentary proof placed by either side in the Court.
ii. Interim maintenance should be fixed not on hard and fast principles, rather based upon a tentative view.
iii. Maintenance should not be fixed on a higher side, which may result into technical knockout of the father so that he could not able to pay the interim maintenance, therefore, his option should also be considered for payment of interim maintenance, which he agrees to pay before the Family Court.
iv. In cases, where father has not explained his monthly income or his financial status in the pleadings, rather concealed his income, the Family Court can rely upon the facts narrated in plaint or on the basis of attached documents vis-a-vis the needs of minor and the verbal stance given by father without reference to his written statement will not be considered justified, hence the Family Court shall exercise discretion to fix the interim maintenance while applying the above principles.
v. In cases, where determination of adequacy or inadequacy of quantum of maintenance requires factual inquiry and evidence in trial, the maintenance should be fixed after consultation with the father and mother as well as keeping in view the day-to-day requirements of minor.
vi. The needs of minor should be considered on the basis of social stratification of family in which minor has been brought up.
vii. The financial status of father could also be considered on the basis of facts narrated in pleadings of the parties, which includes the living standard and previous matrimonial life of the parties in which the mother/wife has been provided with particular kind of living, housing facilities, transportation, gifts, immovable properties of husband and the lifestyle in which husband/father was living prior to separation or divorce or before the institution of suit for maintenance.
viii. In cases, where father being civil servant or employee of any organization. department or company has not appended his salary slips or bank statements, the Family Court shall ask for an undertaking or affidavit regarding his salary and thereafter shall fix the interim maintenance, however after the trial of the case, if the court comes to the conclusion that at the time of fixation of interim maintenance allowance the father/husband has stated a fact beyond his pleadings or undertaking, which is found to be false, such father be burdened with heavy costs and action of perjury may also be initiated against him.
ix. The Family Court may also call the employer of father, HR department, admin department, bank managers, land revenue department, tax record, and banking details as well as salary details of the father directly from the relevant offices while deciding the question of interim maintenance for a prima facie view to fix the allowance in favour of minor so that no inadequacy is attributed while fixing the maintenance allowance.
2021 M L D 337
MUHAMMAD TOUSEEQ DANIAL BHATTI---Petitioner
Versus
AYESHA NAEEM and 2 others---Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1780 of 2020,
(a) Family Courts Act (###V of 1964)---
----S.17-A---Interim maintenance for minors---Scope---Purpose behind interim maintenance is to ensure that during pendency of suit before Family Court, financial constraints faced by minors are ameliorated.
(b) Family Courts Act (###V of 1964)---
----Ss.1-A &17-A---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Maintainability---Interlocutory order---Delay in conclusion of trial---Suit for recovery of maintenance---Father of minor was aggrieved of interim maintenance fixed by Family Court on the plea that the same was exorbitant---Validity---FamilybCourts Act, 1964 was a special law barring right of appeal or revision against interim maintenance order---Constitutional petition against order under S.17-A of Family Courts Act, 1964, was maintainable only if such interim order was coram non judice, wholly or without jurisdiction or based on malafide---Quantum of interim maintenance could not be made a ground for invoking Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court---Trial was not concluded within a period of six months as prescribed by S.12-A of Family Courts Act, 1964---High Court directed Family Court to decide suit for recovery of maintenance within a period of two months so that petitioner could be burdened with interim maintenance for two months only---Order of interim maintenance would subsequently merge into final judgment---Constitutional petition was dismissed in circumstances.
Syeda Farhat Jehan v. Syed lqbal Hussain Rizvi 2010 YLR 3275;
Munir Alam v. Civil Judge, Family Court, Lahore 2009 CLC442;
Abrar Hussain v. Mehwish Rana PLD 2012 Lah. 420; Shahid Ali Gil v. Mst. Ruqayya Bano 2015 MLD 265;
Ali Adnan Dar v. Judge, Family Court PLD 2016 Lah.73 and
Mohtarma Benazir Bhutto v. The State 1999 SCMR 1447 ref.
(c) Family Courts Act (###V of 1964)---
----S. 17-A---Interim maintenance---Quantum---Family Court to adopt a pragmatic approach and fix interim maintenance---Principles enumerated.
