RAJA MUHAMMAD SABIR, J. -- Petitioner is aggrieved against the order dated 10.2.2001 of the learned Additional District Judge, Lahore whereby he affirmed the order of Trial Court dated 6.11.2000 granting interim maintenance to the minors.
2. Briefly the facts of the case are that petitioner was married with Mst. Lshrat Bano mother of respondents Nos. 1 and 3. Unfortunately she has been divorced and the minors are living with the mother. She instituted a suit for maintenance of the minors on 1.4.2000 which is still pending.
Learned Judge Family Court on 6.11.2000 directed the petitioner to pay interim maintenance to the minors at the rate of Rs. 1500/- per month per child. Petitioner dissatisfied with the afore-said order assailed it in appeal which was dismissed through impugned order.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not in a position to pay Rs.
4,500/- per month to respondents Nos. 1 to 3. He has further argued that he is regularly paying maintenance at the rate of Rs. 700/- per month per child which has not been adjusted in the interim order.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner and perused the relevant record. The order dated 6.11.2000 is interim in nature and writ petition is not maintainable against such an order. Minors have alleged in their plaint that the petitioner is a carpenter in Dubai and is earning Rs. 2 lacs per month. The financial status of the petitioner can only be determined after recording of evidence of the parties, therefore, no findings on this issue can be given at this stage. As far as payment of Rs.
700/-per month per child is concerned, if he has paid the afore-said amount he may bring the same in the notice of the Trial Court which shall be duly considered by him. Learned Judge Family Court was competent to grant interim maintenance to the minors. There is no jurisdictional defect or legal infirmity in the impugned order warranting interference. The petition has no merit and is dismissed in limine.