MIAN SAQIB NISAR, J. -- The present mater has arisen out of a suit for maintenance passed in favour of the respondent against Tariq Mehmood, her father. Respondent subsequently filed execution proceedings to recover the maintenance allowance in which certain movable property was attached.
2. Aggrieved by said attachment, petitioner filed objection petition that such movable property belongs to her which could not be attached in execution of decree passed against Tariq Mehmood.
This application was resisted. Issues were framed and the learned Civil Judge, seized of the matter , vide order dated 3.1.1998, dismissed the objection petition. Petitioner impugned the same .In appeal which too was dismissed by the learned Addl. District Judge on 20.6.1998 in limine. Hence this revision petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the Court in appeal has not given any independent finding on the issues. Further, the Appellate Court in the judgment, has stated to have perused the record whereas the same was never summoned by the learned Judge.
4. When confronted with the above, learned counsel for the petitioner does agree for the remand of the case and for reconsideration of the matter by the Court in appeal in accordance with law., However, she states that it is a family matter in which the minor is being deprived of the fruits of the decree since long. Consequently, a request is made for expeditious disposal of the case. Request seems to he reasonable. Accordingly, the case is remanded to the Court in appeal; parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 6.2.1999 and the Trial Court is directed to decide the case without fail by 28.2.1999. During that period, the petitioner shall not alienate, transfer or dispose of the property attached in any manner whatsoever.