 |
| PLD 2026 Lahore 181 |
محتاج والدین بھی بیٹوں سے نان و نفقہ کا دعویٰ فیملی کورٹ میں دائر کر سکتے ہیں، مگر دفعہ 17-A کے تحت دفاع ختم نہیں کیا جا سکتا
تعارف
مختصر کہانی
اہم قانونی نکات
قانونی اہمیت
فیصلہ
Must read Judgement.
PLD 2026 Lahore 181
Before Raheel Kamran, J
AZHAR IJAZ KHAWAJA ---Petitioner
versus
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE and others ---Respondents
Writ Petition No. 58342 of 2025, decided on 27th October, 2025.
PLD
CS Scanned with CamScanner
Like
Comment
Share
182 Lahore]
ALL PAKISTAN LEGAL DECISIONS
[Vol. LXXVIII
(a) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---
----Ss.5, Sched., 12A, 17A & 21A---Dependent parent claiming maintenance from sons---Jurisdiction of family court---Scope---Competence to entertain and adjudicate parental maintenance claims---Striking off defence---Penal provision---Strict construction---Impermissibility in suits filed by parents---Briefly, respondent-mother
182 Lahore
] ALL PAKISTAN LEGAL DECISIONS
[Vol. LXXVIII
(a) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---
----Ss.5, Sched., 12A, 17A & 21A---Dependent parent claiming maintenance from sons---Jurisdiction of family court---Scope---Competence to entertain and adjudicate parental maintenance claims---Striking off defence---Penal provision---Strict construction---Impermissibility in suits filed by parents---Briefly, respondent-mother instituted a suit before the family court seeking maintenance from her sons on the ground of dependency and lack of independent income---During pendency of the proceedings, the family court fixed interim maintenance and directed payment by the 14th of each month---Upon alleged non-paymetal, the family court struck off the defence under S.17-A of the Family Courts Act, 1964 while decreeing the suit and initiating coercive proceedings---The appeal against said orders was dismissed by the district court leading to the filing of the constitutional petition---Pivotal questions requiring determination before the High Court were as to "whether a parent could institute a suit for maintenance against children before the family court"?; and, "whether S.17A of the Family Courts Act, 1964 was applicable to maintenance claims filed by parents"?---Held: Claim of maintenance by dependent parents against their sons, being a family dispute rooted in familial obligations, squarely fell within the domain of "family affairs" and was, therefore, well within the jurisdiction of the family court---As statutory provisions did not expressly define the nature of relationship between the person claiming maintenance and the party against whom maintenance was sought; principles of Islamic law which were the primary source governing family relations had to be applied---Under Islamic jurisprudence, the obligation of sons to maintain their dependent parents squarely fell within the scope of maintenance---Family Court possessed jurisdiction to decide all ancillary issues necessary for complete and effective adjudication of disputes within its domain---The 'Schedule' to the Family Courts Act, 1964 was inclusive and had to be interpreted purposively to advance the true spirit and objective of the statute---A mother or father, if left dependent and without means, could competently invoke jurisdiction of the family court to seek maintenance from their sons---Section 17-A was not attracted to the present dispute wherein a mother had sought maintenance from her sons---However, the authority to pass a final decree for maintenance inherently included the power to grant interim relief pendente lite as an ancillary or necessary measure to prevent destitution during litigation, therefore, the family court was fully empowered to fix and direct the payment of interim maintenance during the pendency of a suit filed by any parent and enforce such judicial orders---Impugned orders of the
PLD
2026]
Azhar Ijaz Khawaja y. Additional District Judge (Raheel Kamran, J.)
[Lahore 183
courts below were set aside and the matter was remanded to the family court to decide the same afresh---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances. (pp. 187, 188] A, B, C & E
(b) Family Courts Act (XXXV of 1964)---
----S.5, Sched.---Dependent mother seeking maintenance from sons---Jurisdiction of family court---Scope---A mother, if left dependent and without sufficient means, may competently invoke the jurisdiction of the family court to seek maintenance from her sons. [p. 188] D
(c) Constitution of Pakistan---
----Art. 199---Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court---Objection not raised through a specific prayer in a constitutional petition, non-entertaining of---Scope---If an objection had not been pressed, through any specific prayer in a constitutional petition before the High Court, then any adjudication on such factual controversy at that stage may effectively result in High Court assuming the role of a court of first instance, thereby, prejudicing the right of appeal of the party who may feel aggrieved by such determination---Thus, findings on such a factual objection should be eschewed and the matter should left open to be examined and decided by the Trial Court in accordance with law. [p. 189] F
Muhammad Faizan-ur-Rehman for Petitioner.
Sami Ullah Azeem for Respondents Nos. 3 and 4..
Muhammad Umar Sheikh for Respondent No. 5 Amicus Curiae: Muhammad Saad Khan.
Date of hearing: 27th October, 2025.
JUDGMENT
RAHEEL KAMRAN, J.---By this petition in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 (hereinafter, 'the Constitution') the petitioner assails the vires of judgment dated 03.09.2025, whereby the Additional District Judge, Lahore, while dismissing the appeal jointly preferred by the petitioner and proforma respondent No.5, affirmed the order dated 20.05.2025 passed by the Family Court Model Town, Lahore.
PLD
Prayer clause of the petition is as under:-
"In view of the above submissions, it is therefore, most respectfully prayed that this writ petition may graciously be accepted and the impugned judgment dated 03.09.2025 passed