Find a Lawyer

MUHAMMAD FAISAL versus MUHAMMAD HAFEEZ-UL-REHMAN KHAN

Constitution Constitution Constitution Constitution Constitution Constitution of Pakistan (3 197319), Article 9 im Constitution The petition for the restoration of the constitutional petition was submitted by the father that his wife was living separately without any justification and she had no family court. There were not enough resources to provide the interim care provided by the parents who had the right to demand care from their father, simply because the rights of the minors could not be denied. There were no resources to provide for the care of the father. Ryz while he was in the other. The applicant, filed under section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, for the custody of minors raised the premise that he had sufficient financial resources to care for and nurture his son and daughter. The grounds are rejected by the applicant's own claim. Conduct for non-compliance of version and order may be punished for each act. Each child was granted a monthly restitution of Rs. 2000 and was maintained by the High Court in exercise of constitutional jurisdiction. \ n

Related judgments — Lahore High Court Lahore, 2009

• MUHAMMAD SALEEM CHAUDHRY v. DEFENCE HOUSING AUTHORITY, COMMERCIAL AREA through Secretary 2009 MLD 720
• Syed KHURRAM GILLANI v. State 2009 PCrLJ 720
• SHAHEEN STEEL FURNACE, GUJRANWALA through Proprietor v. GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN, MINISTRY OF FINANCE through Secretary 2009 PTD 722
• IJAZ v. ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE 2009 PCrLJ 724
• ZAMIR AHMAD KHAN v. Dr. SALEEM HAMEED MALIK 2009 CLC 726
• AKHTAR IQBAL v. MEMBER (JUDICIAL-III) BOARD OF REVENUE PUNJAB 2009 MLD 729
• ASIF KHAN v. State 2009 PCrLJ 729
• MUHAMMAD KHAWAR BASHIR v. State 2009 PCrLJ 736

All Lahore High Court Lahore judgments of 2009 →

list of advocates from Rajana lawyer

Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes