IN THE COURT OF DISTRICT JUDGE XYZ.

Mf Versus Af etc.

Family  Appeal

Recovery of maintenance allowance and respondent/plaintiff No. 2 also sought return of dowry articles and gold jewelry

Appeal No.	Date of Institution	Date of decision
		27.05.2015

J U D G M E N T

         

                    Through this family appeal appellant Mf has partly challenged the judgment & decree dated 00.00.0000 passed by  learned Judge Family Court in family suit titled as Af etc. Versus Mf. (before trial court/original jurisdiction)

2.                Through their family suits the respondents/plaintiffs Af and Bibi who are daughter  and wife of the appellant/defendant sought  recovery of maintenance allowance and respondent/plaintiff No. 2 also sought return of dowry articles and gold jewelry. Vide judgment & decree learned family court partly decreed the suit. As far as minor respondent /plaintiff No.1 is concerned, maintenance allowance Rs. 10,000/- per month was granted to her since 00.00.0000 till her marriage with 10% enhancement per annum.

3.                At the very outset Cn Advocate learned counsel for the appellant submitted that all the matters except maintenance allowance of minor respondent No.1/plaintiff have been settled between the parties  and therefore, he presses  his appeal to the extent  of maintenance  of minor respondent No.1 only.  He further contended that   as per Para No.5 of the plaint the income of appellant is over  Rs. 100,000/- per month  but there is no proof. That plaintiff  as Pw1 did not explain  income of the appellant. That similarly Mz as Pw3 told income of appellant on the basis of conjectural estimate. That the Dws establishes that income of appellant is Rs. 15/20 thousands per month. That learned family court also declared income of appellant as Rs. 100,000/- on the basis of conjectures without any solid evidence. That appellant has also to maintain his parents and brothers/sisters. That maintenance allowance of minor fixed by the learned family court is beyond capacity of appellant which may be reduced  to Rs. 2000/- per month. That salary certificate of appellant could not be given in evidence but its photocopy is placed on file of appeal which shows that his income was 100/- dollars   as on Ist July, 2010.  Reliance was placed on 2005 YLR 1604, 2009 YLR 906, 2000 CLC 558,  2004 CLC 473 and PLD 2003 Supreme Court 475.

4.                Learned counsel for the respondents converted the contentions made on behalf of the appellant and submitted that the judgment & decree of the learned family court may be upheld.

5.                I have heard the exparte arguments and perused the record.

6.                As appellant has pressed the appeal to the extent of rate of maintenance allowance of minor respondent/plaintiff No.1, I shall confine  myself to this extent only. As per  Para No.5 of the plaint the defendant has work of air conditioners and fridges in foreign   and he earns over Rs. 1000,00/-  per month and he can pay maintenance allowance  to plaintiff No.1  @ Rs. 10000/-. As Para No.5 of the written statement the defendant admitted that he repairs Air conditioners etc.  but maintained that his monthly income 15/20 thousands  only. In evidence of plaintiffs,  Bibi plaintiff No.1 herself appeared as Pw1 and her brothers  An and Mz  appeared as Pw2  and Pw3 and gave their evidence by means of their affidavits Ex. P1. Ex.P2 and Ex.P4 respectively, which reiterate the averments made in plaint. During cross examination, Ga Pw1 stated that she knows that defendant earns Rs. 100000/- she denied that the defendant earns Rs. 15/20 thousands. Any suggestion regarding income of the defendant was not given to An Pw2 during cross examination. Mz Pw3 during cross examination stated that the defendant has work of AC/Fridges in foreign and he earns Rs. 100,000/- per month, he stated that he is telling income on the basis of estimate and he does not have any proof.  He denied that the defendant earns Rs. 15/20 thousands per month.  Ir who is brother and Special Power Attorney  of defendant appeared as Dw1, Zi appeared as Dw2 and Ar appeared as Dw3 who gave their evidence by means of their affidavits as Ex. D1 to Ex.D3 respectively. These affidavits are reiteration of written statements. During cross examination, Ir  as Dw1 stated that defendant settled abroad a decade before marriage of the parties. Zr as Dw2 and Ar Dw3 admitted that  defendant is residing in ABROAD to earn  livelihood from 10/15 years before the marriage.  Thus, it is proved that defendant/appellant is settled in ABROAD since long where he works as a mechanic of Air conditioner/fridge. Mechanics  of AC/fridge have good income even in Pakistan. Pakistanis proceed to Middle East only for better financial status. Otherwise, there will be no purpose of leaving their families. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that his monthly income of appellant was 100 Dollars in July, 0000.  One Dollars stands @ Rs.125/-. The present income of appellant/defendant  should be more than that it was in July, 2010. So, the version of the defendant/appellant that his income is Rs. 15/20 thousands  only cannot be believed.  The appellant/defendant is not a raw labor. Admittedly he is a mechanic  of AC/fridge, he is settled in USA since long, USA has one of highest per capita income in world.  In these circumstances, learned family court rightly believed the income of the appellant/defendant claimed by the respondents/plaintiffs. It is contended on behalf of the appellant that appellant has to maintain his parents and brothers/sisters. I may mention that  Mr  Dw1 who is brother of the defendant told his age as 30 years and his profession as textile mechanic.  It is evident that appellant/defendant and his brother can jointly look after their parents.  In the light of the what has been discussed above, I find that rate of maintenance allowance of minor respondent/plaintiff No.1 fixed by the learned trial court is proper.  The impugned judgment & decree do not  suffer from any illegality or misreading or non-reading of evidence.  The appeal is dismissed. Parties are left to bear their own costs.  Decree sheet be drawn. The record of Family Court, copy of this judgment be sent to the Family court and file of this appeal be consigned to the record room after its due completion.    

Announced

00.00.0000

                  

Judge

It is certified this judgment consists of FOUR pages, each page, dictated, corrected and signed by me.

00.00.0000

Judge