Find a Lawyer

MST. IRAM SHAHZAD versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE

Section 25 custody of rival claims for detention is always the welfare of the minor, which is of the utmost importance, and the age, sex and marital status of the sole trait / factor are the only factors for which Should be kept in mind To conclude how the interests and welfare of the minor can be best protected and such factors should not be considered contradictory to the welfare of the father's extraordinary wealth, and he should never be considered a minor child. Cannot be entitled to be in custody. A minor rule or math formula is available to determine the well-being of the Minor Court. Determining the welfare of the minor on the basis of these options is available in the facts and circumstances of each case.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2011

• MUHAMMAD AKRAM BHATTI v. Mst. GHULAM SUGHRA 2011 PLD 355
• MUHAMMAD MAZHAR v. MUHAMMAD FAYYAZ 2011 PCrLJ 357
• MUHAMMAD MUNIR v. State 2011 MLD 358
• SHAHID alias KAKA CHAND v. State 2011 YLR 359
• MUHAMMAD EJAZ v. State 2011 MLD 367
• MUHAMMAD ASLAM v. State 2011 YLR 368
• EHSAN ULLAH v. FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN/PAKISTAN RAILWAYS through Chairman 2011 PLC(CS) 371
• Maj. (Rtd.) MUHAMMAD AYYAZ KHAN DURRANI v. SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE, GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, ISLAMABAD 2011 PLD 372

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2011 →

online advocate from Qalandarabad lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes