Section 5, Schedule and Section 14 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Article 199 Constitutional Petition for the Rehabilitation and Rehabilitation Allowance of the Articles of the Dowry, the Family Court upheld the suit on the extent of the dowry articles as per the list and the three plaintiffs Rs. Given a maintenance allowance. Every month and every month, the defendants did not file any appeal against the Family Court decision; however, the plaintiffs / defendants filed appeals against the Family Court Appellate Court decisions and the decree and the plaintiff. Is entitled to be recovered. As per the certificate issued by the concerned hospital, the expenditure on delivery charges has been increased from Rs. 15,000 per month to Rs. 2000 per month in rehabilitation allowance till the age of the minority is reached. Appellant C was not identified by the applicant / defendants / decision-makers for misreading or not reading any evidence. As a matter of fact being a superior court, the results are not easily disturbed by the High Court's constitutional jurisdiction. What could have been done when there was no wrong reading or non-reading and the scope was not brought to the record and made up of evidence? The offer was to be called the order of the Appellate Court. Constitutional jurisdiction in question
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2010
