Find a Lawyer

MST. ATIA WAHAB versus MUNIR AHMED

Section 5, Schedule 14 (2) (C) and 17 Civil Procedure Code (v. 1908) of the West Pakistan Family Court Act 1964, Second Case of Section 11 suit restitution, restoration of suit for minority maintenance His order was issued in favor of setting aside Rs 200 per child per month and said that till the High Court, the plaintiffs had maintained the order in which they were reduced due to currency and other expenses. The trial court rejected the case and extended it to the father of the minor, the defendant, the defendant, from Rs 200 to 300 rupees. VPA did not challenge the monthly maintenance allowance, but the plaintiffs have appealed, requesting that the increased amount of the maintenance allowance be too exhausting and should be increased further. The appellate court rejected the appeal on the ground that it was not enforceable under section 14 (2) (c) of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964. The defendant had a claim that the second case was not sustained because that is why the second case was banned under section 11 of the CPC, section 17 of the West Pakistan Family Courts Act 1964, in favor of the defendant. The ensuing dispute was first canceled, as the objection was never raised by the defendant. Second, before the courts below; secondly, this decree passed in the trial court's second case was never available by the defendant or by any appeal or constitutional petition. And finally, even if the second case is stayed, it can still be considered as a different application and lawer from fb area from Khanewal lawyer