' This is a petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 arising out of maintenance matter under Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 filed by Mst. Rukhsana Shakil respondent No,3 who was married to Syed Muhammad Abid petitioner on 12th of February, 1987.
The marriage unfortunately ended in dissolution through Talaq pronounced by the ,petitioner on 15th of June, 1987 about which, the Chairman of Arbitration Council was duly informed as required by section 7 of Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961.. During the pendency of those proceedings, an application under section 9 (2) of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 was filed by respondent No,3, in which she demanded maintenance at the rate of Rs,3,000 per month w,e,f. 12th February, 1987. This application was allowed by the Arbitration Council and the petitioner was directed to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs,3,000 w,e,f. 12th February, 1987 till 15th of September, 1987 when the divorce became effective.
2. The revision filed by the petitioner against this order has been dismissed by the Collector, Lahore on 10th January, 1989.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. No one has appeared on behalf of respondent No,3. She is, therefore, proceeded against ex parte.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised two contentions; firstly, that the Arbitration Council has awarded maintenance for the period during which parties were living together, secondly, that the rate on which the maintenance has been granted is exorbitant.
5. The first contention of the learned counsel is supported by the contents of the application made by respondent No,3 for grant of maintenance itself, in which she admitted that the parties had lived together in Saudi Arabia from 1st April, 1987, till June, 1987. There was as such no justification for the Arbitration Council to grant the maintenance for this period.
6. So far as the contention of the learned counsel regarding rate of maintenance, there is nothing on the record to suggest that. The award of Rs,3,000 per month as maintenance is excessive or exorbitant. The Arbitration Council has taken into consideration the fact that the petitioner was .Working in Saudi Arabia and drawing a handsome salary every month.
' In view of what has been stated above the order of the1Arbitration Council to the extent it directs the petitioner to pay maintenance for the period from 1st of April 1987 to 10th of June, 1987 is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect wi h the result that the petitioner shall be liable to pay maintenance for the remaining period at the rate of Rs,3,000 per month. No orders as to costs. y.