Suit For Recovery of Maintenance, Family Case, Maintenance Allowance (Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961) (THE WEST PAKISTAN FAMILY COURTS ACT ,1964)

in the court of senior civil judge/judge family court Rawalpindi

1.           Mst. Noreen Bibi wife of Tayab al Rahman daughter of Jan Muhammad resident of House No. 600,  Street No. 500, Block V , Satellite Town, Tehsil and District Rawalpindi. Through her real father Jan Muhammad son of Illahi Bux.

---------Plaintiff

Versus

1.           Tayab al Rahman son of Muhammad Yahya resident of House No 999, Street No. 777, Satellite Town, Tehsil and District Rawalpindi. 

--------Defendant

Suit for Recovery of Maintenance Allownce

Respectfully Sheweth :

1.           That the plaintiff and defendant both are (Dumb and Deaf) however defendant is capable of reading and writing, whereas the plaintiff has become slightly insane due to circumstances mentioned below and filing the instant suit through her real father (Jan Muhammad) , who has no adverse interest against the plaintiff.

2.           That the plaintiff was married with defendant according to Muslim Rites (Muhammadan Law) on 15-11-2005 in consideration of dower amount of Rs. 30,000/- in shape of  gold ornaments which was paid at the time of Nikah. (Copy of Nikahnama is attached).

3.           That after the marriage the plaintiff performed her matrimonial obligations towards the defendant but out of said wedlock no issue has born.

4.           That initially the behavior of the defendant was normal but later on the behavior of the defendant totally changed when defendant’s mother asked him to marry another woman after divorcing plaintiff and after that defendant often used to torture the plaintiff mentally as well as physically.

5.           That on 14-06-2013 the defendant expelled the plaintiff from his house after severe beating in three wearing clothes and snatched all the dowry articles and other belongings of the plaintiff and since that the defendant has not paid any single penny to the plaintiff as maintenance allowance. The defendant is legally and morally bound to pay the maintenance allowance to the plaintiff and whereas the plaintiff is residing continuously with her parents’ in their house since that and all the expenditures are being borne by them.

6.           That the plaintiff wants to go back to the defendant’s house to perform matrimonial obligations toward defendant, but the defendant and his mother don’t let her to do so.

7.           That due to the circumstances mentioned in Para 4, 5 and 6 plaintiff has become heavily depressed and slightly insane. 

8.           That the parents of plaintiff made efforts and tried to reconcile the matter but the defendant refused to do the needful as per their obligations. 

9.           That the defendant is employed in Rahat Woollen Mills (PVT) LTD. 400-a Peshawar Road, Rawalpindi. The monthly income of defendant is more than 13,000/- per month. The defendant can easily provide the above said maintenance to the plaintiff.

10.       That the cause of action firstly accrued on 14-06-2013 when the defendant expelled the plaintiff from his house and lastly a week ago when the defendant refused to give maintenance allowance to the plaintiff and is continuing.

11.       That the plaintiff and defendant are residing at Rawalpindi, hence this learned Court has got jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit.

12.       That the prescribed court fee has been affixed on the       plaint.

PRAYER

It is therefore, respectfully prayed that the suit of the plaintiff may kindly be decreed in favour of plaintiff against the defendant in the following manner:-

             i.             A decree for recovery of maintenance allowance @ Rs. 5,000/- per month to plaintiff since June 2013 and future at the same rate.

           ii.             That the defendant may kindly be directed to allow the plaintiff to go back to defendant’s house to perform matrimonial obligations.

Any other relief which this Honorable court deems fit and proper may also be granted to the plaintiff.

.

Plaintiff

    

Through:   

Name of Advocate / Lawyer,

    

Advocate High Court.

.  

Verification

Verified on oath on this ____ day of  March 2014 that the contents of the paras 1 to  12 are true and contents of remaining paras are believe to be true according to the information received.                                      

Plaintiff