Find a Lawyer

TARIQ MEHMOOD versus MST. FARAH SHAHEEN

Section 5 and the suit rate for the recovery of care by the wife, determining the husband's income, the wife's evidence cannot be expected to document the evidence of her husband's income from the duty of the court himself. Be able to explain what a husband's income can be, but not to accept a husband based on unstable or practically flawed principles.

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010

• Mehr MUHAMMAD NASEEM v. WATER AND POWER DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY through Chairman 2010 YLR 340
• SAIFULLAH v. MEHR MUHAMMAD 2010 PLD 341
• MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ v. MEMBER (JUDICIAL-II) BOARD OF REVENUE, PUNJAB, LAHORE 2010 CLC 342
• TARIQ AHMAD v. RAFIA TABASSUM 2010 YLR 347
• RAHM DAD v. MANAGING DIRECTOR, FAUJI FOUNDATION, RAWALPINDI CANTT. 2010 PLD 349
• MANZOOR AHMAD v. GHULAM NABI 2010 CLC 350
• MUHAMMAD NAWAZ v. Mst. ABIDA BIBI 2010 MLD 352
• MUHAMMAD LATIF v. BOARD OF REVENUE through Senior Member (Revenue) Punjab, Lahore 2010 YLR 353

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2010 →

patent advocate from Harnai lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes