Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD YOUNAS versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, PASRUR

Article 5 Constitution of Pakistan, Article 199 Constitutional Application Rehabilitation Allowance Annual Increase In principle, the complaint of the father of the minor was that the Family Court had also fixed the monthly restitution allowance by 15%. The responsibility for the annual increase in the care of minors, as the courts below the High Court, refuses to interfere with the rehabilitation award given to minors, but the annual rate of rehabilitation is reduced from 15% to 5%. Done. The court was allowed to increase its care due to any change in the circumstances

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• Mst. SUMAIRA NOREEN v. DISTRICT EDUCATION OFFICER (COLLEGES) SIALKOT 2011 PLC(CS) 485
• NABILA KIANI v. Mst. FAROOQ SULTAN 2011 CLC 487
• GULFAM AHMED v. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, GUJRANWALA 2011 PCrLJ 487
• ASHIQ HUSSAIN SABRI v. SECRETARY HEALTH, GOVERNMENT OF THE PUNJAB 2011 PLD 490
• FAROOQ ARSHAD v. State 2011 PCrLJ 493
• MUHAMMAD MANZOOR v. PROVINCE OF PUNJAB 2011 CLC 494
• MUHAMMAD IQBAL v. ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, RAHIMYAR KHAN 2011 PLD 497
• MUMTAZ AHMAD KHAN v. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND PHYSICAL PLANNING 2011 YLR 500

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

Pakistan, top advocate family court from Murree lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes