ALTAF HUSSAIN versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BHALWAL
Section 5, Schedule and Section 14 suit, appeal against the maintenance allowance bar where the recovery allowance was not more than Rs. 1000 per month is allowed at the rate of Rs. 800 per month for the claim of the claimant in favor of the claimant's two minor sons. The father of each of the minors / decedent filed an appeal against the family court's judgment and decree, which was dismissed for lack of a retainer bar against the appeal where the recovery allowance was not more than Rs. 1000. Yes, every month was not without logic. Minimizing restitution allowances and protecting claimants who are already pressing hard to meet basic requirements Constitutional jurisdiction is the pursuit of justice only to prevent unlawful acts or substances. Can be used for service. The plaintiffs / decision makers were banned under Secto due to the irregularities filed before the Appellate Court for the simple reason that the rehabilitation allowance rate was 1000 for the West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 (2) of 1964. The rupee was less than a monthly seed bar, however, it was not operational against any order holder satisfied with the amount of the maintenance allowance. The plaintiff / decree-holder was rightly allowed, and the defendants / decision-makers were rightfully dismissed.
Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009
