' M. SOHAIL IQBAL BHATTI, J. Through this writ petition the petitioner has sought the indulgence of this Court for setting aside the order and decree dated 29.1.2014 and judgment and decree dated 14.4.2014 passed by the learned Judge Family Court, Bahawalnagar, and the judgment and decree dated 17.9.2014 passed by the learned District Judge, Bahawalnagar.
2. The facts of the case are that on 24.12.2011 respondents No, 3 and 4 filed a suit for recovery of maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs, 5000/- per month alongwith payment of past maintenance allowance amounting to Rs, 300,000/- and recovery of delivery expenses amounting to Rs, 15,000/- against the petitioner. The petitioner filed a contesting written statement; the learned Judge Family Court, through order dated 24.5.2012, directed the petitioner to pay an interim maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs, 1000/- per month to respondent No, 4 and after failure of pre-trial reconciliation proceedings the following issues were framed:---
(1) Whether the plaintiffs are entitled to recover maintenance allowance from the defendant if so, at what rate and for which period? OPP
(2) Whether plaintiff No, 1 is entitled to recover Rs, 15,000/- as delivery expenses from the defendant? OPP
(3) Relief.
3. The petitioner, despite the order dated 24.5.2012 for payment of interim maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs, 1000/- per month to respondent No, 4, did not pay a single penny and, therefore, the learned Judge Family Court, vide order and decree dated 29.1.2014, struck off the right of defence of the petitioner under Section 17-A of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 and while deciding the suit for recovery of maintenance allowance to the extent of minor/respondent No, 4 fixed the final maintenance allowance of the minor son of the petitioner/respondent No, 4 at the rate of Rs, 3000/- per month with 10% annual enhancement till his attaining the age of majority; and thereafter fixed the case for producing of evidence by respondent No,
3. After adducing of evidence of respondent No, 3 the claim of respondent No, 3 was disallowed and the suit filed by respondent No, 3 to the extent of recovery of maintenance owance and recovery of delivery expenses was dismissed vide judgment and decree dated 14.4.2014.
4. The petitioner filed an appeal against the order and decree dated 29.1.2014 and judgment and decree dated 14.4.2014 (although the suit filed by respondent No, 3 to the extent of recovery of maintenance allowance and recovery of delivery expenses was dismissed) the learned Appellate Court, through judgment and decree dated 17.9.2014, dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner.
Hence, this writ petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that both the Courts below while passing the impugned order, judgment and decrees have committed material irregularities and illegalities and did not apply their judicial mind. It has been further argued that both the Courts below did not examine the evidence in its true perspective.
6. I have considered the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. It is established from the record that after filing of written statement the learned Judge Family Court, through order dated 24.5.2012, fixed the interim maintenance allowance to be paid to the minor son of the petitioner/respondent No, 4 at the rate of Rs, 1000/- per month but the petitioner did not pay a, single penny till 29.1.2014 and the learned Judge Family Court while invoking the penal provisions of Section 17-A of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 struck off the right of defence of the petitioner and passed a decree in favour of respondent No, 4 granting the maintenance allowance at the rate of Rs, 3000/- per month with 10% annual enhancement till his attaining the age of majority. Section 17-A of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 is reproduced below:-- "17-A. Interim order for maintenance.- At any stage of proceedings in a suit for maintenance, the Family Court may pass an interim order for maintenance, whereunder the payment shall be made by the fourteenth of each month, failing which the Court may strike off the defence of the defendant and decree the suit."
7. The perusal of Section 17-A of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 makes it abundantly clear that the Family Court can pass an order for payment of interim maintenance during the pendency of a suit and failure to comply with such order would necessarily entail penal consequences of closing the right of defence and passing of decree. It is not out of place to mention that the petitioner did not challenge the decree dated 29.1.2014 passed in terms of Section 17-A of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964; however, after dismissal of suit filed by respondent No. 3 on 14.4.2014 the petitioner filed an appeal challenging both the order and judgment and decrees.
8. This Court is of the opinion that the appeal filed against the judgment and decree dated 14.4.2014 was misconceived as the suit filed by respondent No, 3 had been dismissed by the learned Judge Family Court and it was only an attempt to challenge the order and decree. Dated 29.1.2014 passed in favour of respondent No, 4 which had become time-barred as an appeal could only have been filed within a period of thirty days under Rule 22 of West Pakistan Family Courts Rules, 1965.
9. This Court is not in agreement with the arguments advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had no knowledge of passing of order and decree dated 29.1.2014 as the order-sheet reveals that the order passed under Section 17-A of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 was announced in presence of learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner, for the first time, was directed to deposit a meager amount of Rs, 1000/- per month as an interim maintenance allowance to respondent No, 4 on 24.5.2012 but he did not bother to deposit even a single penny till 29.1.2014 when his right of defence was struck off and order and decree was passed in favour of respondent No,
4. This Court cannot hold itself back from observing that West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 is a special statute and has been enacted with a specific purpose. The powers have been conferred under Section 17-A of West Pakistan Family Courts Act, 1964 to grant interim maintenance allowance to the concerned parties and it has also been mandated that such maintenance allowance shall be paid by the fourteenth day of each calendar month. The sole purpose behind this legislation is to ensure that during pendency of the proceedings with the Family Court financial constraints faced by the minors are ameliorated.
10. For what has been discussed above, this Court is not inclined to exercise powers under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 as no jurisdictional error has been committed by both the Courts below. This petition is therefore dismissed in limine.