Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD IQBAL versus VTH ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE

Section 5 and Schedule of the Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional petition restoration of minor applicant (father of minor respondents) was aircraft engineer in PIA and his monthly salary was Rs 37,000. Monthly care was set at Rs 5, 000 000 each each Each appellate court kept the verdict after divorcing his first wife (minor respondents' mother) and the second marriage contract was made and the married person married. There was also the childhood of the child, which he maintained very well even though the real father of the minor respondents did not pay. He had no knowledge about their care and their health and education. Minors had the right to claim proper care of their father in view of the quality of their father; no waste can be recovered from the monthly restitution allowance of Rs 10,000 by the minors or their mother, the Family Court said in the evidence. Considering that, these days it would be enough to barely meet their modest needs. In its true context, the appellate court justified not to interfere. The same High Court rejected the constitutional petition. jobs for fresh advocates from Tando Adam lawyer