— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for maintenance — Duty of grandfather — Scope — Where grandfather is affluent, then the obligation to maintain children lies on the grandfather but only when father is poor, infirm and incapable of earning by his own labour and mother is also poor. [2024 CLS 17 = 2024 CLC 141 = 2023 LHC 5606]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art. 129(g) —  Suit for maintenance — Withholding best evidence — Scope — When a father makes it impossible to reach a just conclusion as to his earning or paying capacity, by mis-declarations or unfair disclosures as well as by hiding his sources then the Family Courts are empowered to draw adverse inference. [2024 CLS 17 = 2024 CLC 141 = 2023 LHC 5606]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for maintenance — Quantum of maintenance allowance, determination of — Scope — While passing a decree for maintenance it should be borne in mind that the case is one of maintenance and decree should be passed after taking into account the requirements for proper upbringing of a child or children after scrutinizing income and finances of father but at the same time the order should not result into unjust enrichment of one side or operate as vexatious or oppressive to a father. [2024 CLS 17 = 2024 CLC 141 = 2023 LHC 5606]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for maintenance — Quantum of maintenance allowance, determination of — Scope — Fixing quantum of maintenance always requires to strike a balance between needs of minors and earnings of a father as well as his other sources — The award in favour of minors should not be incompatible or inconsistent with the financial conditions of father or the one who is held to be obliged by law to take care of children — The Family Courts should consider the education, medical, food expenses and other day to day needs of minor(s) at one side and on the other hand, they are required to determine the financial status of the father. [2024 CLS 17 = 2024 CLC 141 = 2023 LHC 5606]

— S. 5 — Suit for maintenance against grandfather — Scope — Question for determination before Supreme Court was whether a decree for maintenance passed against the father of a child could be executed against the grandfather or the child had to institute a suit for maintenance against his grandfather, in case no property of his father, the judgment debtor, is found for the execution of the decree — Held; the obligation of a grandfather to maintain his grandchild is dependent upon two conditions: (i) the father of the child must be a poor person who has no financial resources to maintain that child, and (ii) the grandfather of the child must be a person who is financially in easy circumstances — In case either of these conditions is not fulfilled, the grandfather is not under any obligation to maintain his grandchild — These two conditions are thus also the grounds of defence available to a grandfather against whom his grandchild makes a claim of maintenance — A child who claims his maintenance from his grandfather has to prove these two conditions, and the grandfather must be provided with an opportunity to defend the claim made against him by rebutting the existence of either of these two facts. [PLR 2024 SC 4 = PLD 2024 SC 67 = 2023 SCP 344]

— S. 5 — Suit for maintenance — Obligation of grandfather — Scope — If the father of a child has died or the father, being a poor person, has no financial resources to maintain his child, the obligation to maintain such child passes on to his grandfather provided he is financially in easy circumstances. [PLR 2024 SC 4 = PLD 2024 SC 67 = 2023 SCP 344]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for recovery of dowry articles — Scope — Husband’s (petitioner) case was that there was no evidence that the car was given at the time of marriage as part of the dowry and that the Appellate Court had wrongly decreed the suit — Validity — Petitioner in response to the respondent’s (wife) plaint had stated that the car was purchased with the cash provided by him, as such, it was also registered in his name in token of acknowledgment — Response of the petitioner, in his written statement, had exhibited an admission on part of the petitioner that the car, in fact, was purchased and transferred in the name of the petitioner, at the time of wedding, albeit with cash amount given by the petitioner — Petitioner had not proved his stance by leading any evidence — Moreover, there was no explanation as to why the petitioner remained mum and did not demand the delivery of the car, from the father of respondent for a considerable period of time, when the marriage between the parties was subsisting and the relationship was cordial, therefore, the assertion of petitioner that no such car was ever purchased or delivered to the petitioner was baseless and hence, discarded — Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. [PLR 2023 Lahore 8 = PLD 2023 Lahore 669 = 2023 LHC 2845]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for recovery of dowry articles — Alternate price of dowry articles — Appreciation of value of dowry articles — Scope — Husband’s (petitioner) case was that there was no evidence that the car was given at the time of marriage as part of the dowry and that the Appellate Court had wrongly decreed the suit — Wife’s (respondent) case was that alternate price of the car had not been properly determined/ascertained by the Appellate Court and the prayer was made for award of current market value of the car and not the date on which it was given — Validity — In case of articles such as the car, while determining/ascertaining amount of money as an alternate price, the principle of appreciation should be kept in mind inasmuch as if the principle of depreciation is to be considered with respect to one set of the dowry articles such as furniture, etc., which involves depreciation of articles on account of wear and tear, the principle of appreciation must also be taken into account with respect to such other articles that involve increase in value — Failure to do so would not only by iniquitous but would also put premium on the unlawful retention of such dowry articles by the husband even after the dissolution of marriage or demand for return of the same by the wife — Wife was held entitled to recover the market value of the car as on the date of realization of the decree — Constitutional petitions were disposed of accordingly. [PLR 2023 Lahore 8 = PLD 2023 Lahore 669 = 2023 LHC 2845]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for recovery of dowry articles — Alternate price of dowry articles — Appreciation of value of dowry articles — Depreciation of value of dowry articles — Scope — Primarily a suit for the return of dowry articles, whenever decided, is decreed by the Courts as such with the observation that in case of failure, on the part of the judgment-debtor, to return the said articles, as an alternate, the amount equivalent to the price of dowry articles is to be paid and while determining the alternate value of the dowry articles, the Courts consider the depreciation of most of the dowry articles on account of normal and natural wear and tear thereof that takes place over the passage of time since marriage of the parties — The rationale underlying the application of principle of depreciation is that the dowry articles are to be returned in their current position and if the same is not done, their price is to be paid as an alternate and since most of the value of dowry articles put to use during subsistence of marriage do undergo depreciation on account of daily use, therefore, while determining the alternate price, it is justifiable that the depreciation in value of such articles is to be taken into account — However, once cannot lose sight of the fact that there may be some articles forming party of the dowry, for instance, the gold ornaments or the vehicles or even few electrical appliances, etc., value whereof may appreciate over the years. [PLR 2023 Lahore 8 = PLD 2023 Lahore 669 = 2023 LHC 2845]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for recovery of dowry articles — Gold ornaments — Scope — Gold ornaments are always possessed by females unless snatching is not only alleged but also proved. [PLR 2023 Lahore 8 = PLD 2023 Lahore 669 = 2023 LHC 2845]

— S. 5 & Sched. — Suit for recovery of dowry articles — Dowry articles — Meaning — Any gift given to the groom at the time of engagement, cannot be treated as part of the dowry as the same is not the property of wife rather ownership vests with the husband — Dowry is only such articles that are given at the time of marriage to the bride and not the gifts to the bridegroom at the time of engagement. [PLR 2023 Lahore 8 = PLD 2023 Lahore 669 = 2023 LHC 2845]