SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, J.--- In this constitutional petition the petitioner has prayed for setting aside judgment, dated 14-12-2005 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Okara and judgment and decree, dated 12-9-2005 passed by learned Judge Family Court, Okara.
2. Relevant facts for the disposal of this writ petition are that Mst. Iqbal Bibi, petitioner filed suit for maintenance allowance against her father (Bashir Ahmad, respondent No.1) and stated that he has not paid her maintenance allowance, therefore, she was constrained to file suit. The respondent mentioned in written statement that petitioner had been living with him but on 16-1- 2005 maternal-grandmother and maternal-uncle of petitioner visited his house in his absence and took her away. He further mentioned that he had engaged the petitioner with his nephew and it was settled that "Rukhsati" would take place on 5-2-2005. Learned trial Court framed issues, recorded evidence and dismissed the suit brought by petitioner vide judgment, dated 12-9-2005.
The petitioner filed appeal there against which was dismissed vide judgment, dated 14-12-2005 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Okara. Hence this writ petition.
3. 1 have heard the arguments and perused the record.
4. As mentioned above petitioner had filed suit for maintenance allowance against her father (Bashir Ahmad, respondent No.1). The case of petitioner' is that her father is bound to provide her maintenance but he has failed to provide the same. However, the case of respondent is that maternal-grandmother and maternal-uncle of petitioner took her with them from his house in his absence without his consent hence she cannot claim maintenance allowance from him. Also that he intended to perform her marriage with his nephew but petitioner is not ready to contract marriage, therefore, she is not entitled to get maintenance allowance from him. Mst. Igbal Bibi, petitioner while appearing as P.W.1 during cross-examination stated that she is aged about 18/19 years and she does not want to contract marriage. The plaintiff stated that she would not contract marriage 'even if her father selects a good boy (bridegroom) for her and that she wants to live with her maternal-grandmother and maternal-uncle. She admitted that she had filed application against her father (respondent) for registration of a criminal case but the same was, dismissed.
Bashir Ahmad respondent appeared as D.W. 1 and stated that he had engaged the plaintiff with his nephew, Ghulam Sabir and date (5-2-2005) was fixed for her marriage but before the said date plaintiff/ petitioner went to the house of her maternal-grandmother in his absence. He asked her maternal-grandfather etc. For restoration of his daughter but petitioner filed application against him for registration of a criminal case, which was dismissed. It is clear from the material available on record that petitioner is living with her maternal-grandmother and maternal-uncle without consent of her father (respondent). It is in evidence that petitioner is aged about 19 years and that Bashir Ahmad (petitioner's father) intended to bring the petitioner in his house but she refused. Also that her father wanted to perform her marriage with his nephew but she left his house before the date fixed for the marriage. Learned trial Court observed that petitioner is not entitled to get maintenance allowance from her father and dismissed her suit. The father is not liable to maintain a grown up and disobedient daughter especially one who is of marriageable age and is living away without his consent. Reliance can be placed on the case of Mst. Ghulam Fatima v. Sheikh Muhammad Bashir PLD 1958 (W.P.) Lah. 596. So judgment dated 12-9-2005 passed by learned trial Court is just and proper. The judgment dated 14-12-2005 shows that learned Additional District Judge has decided the appeal brought by petitioner after appraisal of entire material available on record. There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgments, therefore, there is no justification to set aside the same.
5. The upshot of the above discussion this writ petition has no force and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine.