' In this Constitutional petition, the petitioner has prayed for setting aside judgment, dated 31-3- 2003 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Gujranwala and judgment, dated 5-7-2003 passed by learned District Judge, Gujranwala.
2. Relevant facts for the disposal of this writ petition are that Mst. Shermeeli Arooj Butt (respondent No,3) filed a suit for maintenance allowance against her father (Mehmood Asif Butt, petitioner) and stated that he had failed to pay her maintenance allowance since her birth. She c)aimed Rs,24,70,000 as past maintenance allowance and Rs,10,000 per month for future. The petitioner mentioned in his written statement that earlier plaintiff/respondent and her mother had filed a suit for maintenance allowance and the same was dismissed as withdrawn on 23-9-1981 because defendant had paid Rs,27,000 and ornaments of gold weighing 12 Tolas to her mother regarding maintenance of the plaintiff. After recording evidence learned trial Court decreed the suit brought by respondent in her favour on 31-3-2003 and directed the petitioner to pay Rs,2,000 per month as maintenance allowance for a total period of 3-1/2 years as she had contracted marriage on 15-3- 2001. The petitioner filed appeal against the said judgment and the same was dismissed on 5-7- 2003. Hence, this writ petition.
3. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
4. Admittedly Mst. Shermeeli Arooj Butt, respondent No,3 is daughter of petitioner. As such he is bound to provide her maintenance allowance. The case of petitioner is that respondent and her mother had earlier filed a suit for maintenance allowance and the same was dismissed as withdrawn vide order, dated 23-9-1981, therefore, she could not file fresh suit for maintenance allowance. It is pertinent to note that petitioner has placed on record copy of application (Annexure "F") submitted before learned trial Court for withdrawal of the aforesaid case. The perusal of the same shows that Mst. Farzana Kausar (respondent's mother) had received Rs,27,000 and ornaments of gold regarding dower, dowry, her own maintenance allowance and the maintenance allowance of minor (Mst. Shermeeli Arooj Butt, respondent No,3) from the petitioner through his father. This application further shows that she had received maintenance allowance for the plaintiff till she attained the age of majority and that she (minor) would remain with her till majority. Respondent No,3 was born on 4-1-1980. The perusal of impugned judgments shows that learned trial Court and learned District Judge allowed her maintenance allowance only for 3-1/2 years. She had attained majority at that time. So, contention of petitioner is devoid of force. As such in the circumstances of the case I find that learned trial Court has rightly allowed maintenance allowance to the respondent. The perusal of judgment, dated 5-7-2003 shows that learned District Judge decided the appeal brought by petitioner after appraisal of entire material available on record. There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned judgments, therefore, there is no justification to set aside the same.
5. The upshot of the above discussion is that this writ petition has no force and the same is accordingly dismissed.