M.A. ZAFAR, J. --- Sajid Nazir petitioner has filed this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973 assailing the judgment and decree dated 31.3.2008 passed by the learned Judge Family Court, Sialkot granting maintenance at the rate of Rs.1500/- per month each to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 which was maintained by the learned District Judge, Sialkot vide judgment and decree dated 8.7.2008.
2. Petitioner was married to Mst. Yasmin in March 1999 and out of the wedlock Sarosh Sajid aged seven years and Sadeem Sajid aged five years (Respondents Nos. 1&2) were born. Divorce between the parties took place in the year 2005.
Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 through their mother Mst. Yasmin filed a suit for maintenance allowance in September 2006 which was contested by the present petitioner and from the pleadings of the parties, learned Judge Family Court framed the following issues:---
(i) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to a decree for maintenance allowance, if so at what rate and for what period? OPP.
(ii) Whether next friend of plaintiffs has not, been appointed their guardian by a competent Court who has an interestoadverse to that of plaintiffs/minors, therefore, the suit is liable to be dismissed? OPD (i.e) Whether the suit has been filed to harass and blackmail the defendant, 'which is liable to be dismissed? OPD.
(iv) Relief.
3. After taking into consideration the evidence adduced by the parties, the learned Trial Court decreed the suit declaring them entitled to recover maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs,.
1500/- per month each with 20% annual increase which judgment and decree has been maintained by the learned District Judge, Sialkot.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is working abroad and. His monthly salary is Rs.1,000/- Saudi Riyal and he has to maintain his parents as well as second were and children.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner I' find that to maintain the child' is the sole responsibility of the father who is enjoying his matrimonial life in Saudi Arabia with his second were.
According to the learned counsel for the petitioner on saying his income is 1,000 Saudi Riyal . Which comes equivalent to Pak Rupees.19,000/- per month and thus it cannot be said that Rs. 3,000/- allowed by the learned Courts below to two minor children from his first were are excessive. There is concurrent finding of fact. No misreading and non-reading of evidence has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner so much so even the evidence recorded by the learned Trial Court have not been annexed with this petition. Resultantly, there is no force in this petition and the same is accordingly dismissed in limine.