Syed waseem iqbal

PLJ 2024 Lahore (Note) 19 [Multan Bench, Multan] Present: Ahmad Nadeem Arshad, J. TAHIR MAHMOOD--Petitioner versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, BUREWALA, etc.--Respondents W.P. No. 11802 of 2023, decided on 26.10.2023. Family Courts Act, 1964 (XXXV of 1964)-- ----S. 14--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 199--Constitutional Petition--Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance--Maintenance allowance i.e. Rs. 2,000/- per month--Cancellation of mutation--Suit for recovery of maintenance allowance against father of petitioner--Suit was decreed--For satisfaction of decree, respondents filed an execution petition--Said father died and his legal heirs were impleaded in amended execution petition--After his demise, respondents No--3 to 5 filed an objection petition that Mutation No. 1644 should be cancelled--Trial Court allowed application and consequently cancelled mutation--Petitioner has filed an objection petition dismissed--Father-in-Law of respondents No. 3 was alienated his property to his sons through Mutation No. 1644, which was cancelled by Executing Court on application of Respondents--The property reverted to original owner decree passed against said father, has ceased to have effect against him after his demise but his property is still liable to satisfy decretal amount--A very meager amount of maintenance allowance to each respondents, petitioner, who is real paternal uncle of respondents No. 4 & 5, rather than paying the maintenance happily to the daughters of his deceased brother, is dragging them in the Court through unncessary litigation--Courts below have rightly dismissed objection petition of petitioner. [Para 2, 5 & 6] A, B, C, D & E