1. 'MRS. QAISER IQBAL, J.---The petitioner has invoked Constitutional Jurisdiction assailing the judgment and decree passed by the learned VIIIth Additional District and Sessions Judge Karachi South in Family Appeal No,12/2006 vide judgment dated 12-8-2006 whereby both the appeals were dismissed, order passed by learned IInd Family Judge Karachi South in G&W Suit No,393/2003 was maintained, whereby the Guardians and Wards Application filed by the petitioner was dismissed.
2. 'Necessary facts for the disposal of the appeal are that the petitioner was married to the respondent, out of we'dlock one child namely Javeria was born. On account of the disputes they could not lead happy life. The petitioner has filed application under section 25 of Guardians and Wards Act which was contested by the mother on the premises that the minor was daughter aged about 10 years keeping in view her welfare, custody be delivered to father. However, father was not deprived of the visitation rights and it was ordered that the custody of the minor will be delivered to the father as per arrangement.
3. Both the Courts below have decided the issues involved against the petitioner such findings have been assailed in the special jurisdiction. Learned counsel for petitioner has contended that the father being the natural guardian has a vested right to retain the custody of daughter now aged about 14 years.
4. 'It is urged that the mother has been tutoring the minor adversely causing effect upon her upbringing. It is next urged that the visitation arrangement by the Courts below ought to have resolved the difference to a greater extent, due to hurdles and barriers on the part of the mother the visitation could not take place, the above connection was negated by the learned counsel for the respondent. It is urged that on account of non-payment of maintenance the minor could not join hands with father mother never interfered or persuaded the minor not to meet her father.
5. 'I have carefully considered the judgments of two Courts below, perused the record of the case.
6. The paramount duty of the Court is to adjudge the dispute, in line with the B welfare of the minor Javeria, she has been brought up since birth by the mother, now aged about, 14 years appeared in Court on 13-1-2009, she has met her father in the Court expressed her willingness and desire to live with the mother. At this juncture taking into the consideration the age of the minor child I am not inclined to interfere in the impugned judgments to the effect that the custody of the minor should remain with the mother. Learned counsel for petitioner has candidly conceded that the best course in the interest of the minor is that the visitation arrangement made by the Appellate Court be maintained whereby the father be allowed to take custody of minor on first. Saturday of every month from 5 a.m. Be directed to return the custody of the minor to her mother on next evening at 5 p.m. Such directions shall not be binding upon the parties during examinations of the minor. With the above observations C.P. No,S-436/2006 stands disposed off accordingly.