Islamabad:
In the event of dissolution of a marriage, the amount of maintenance depended on a mother receives from her former husband for a child, of both the nature and the extent of the child’s “reasonable demands” and the father’s financial means.
In a recent five -page verdict, the Supreme Court has provided guidelines to determine the maintenance amount to be received for a child after dissolution of a marriage.
Chief Justice of Pakistan Yahya Afridi and Justice Shakeel Ahmad heard the case with the junior judge who wrote the verdict. The judgment noted that maintenance traditionally includes food, clothing and lodging. However, this list is not exhaustive.
It said that in view of the developing societal standards and the overall principle of the underage welfare, the term must be widely interpreted to include all reasonable expenses needed for the physical, mental and emotional development of the child. “This includes, among other things, educational costs, healthcare and other needs that are in line with minor growth and comfort,” the verdict said.
It said the amount stated should reflect the family’s social status, which ensures that the child is not deprived of the possibilities of development and well -being solely because of the dissolution of marriage.
“The second consideration relates to the father’s financial capacity to preserve the child. Under Islamic principles, the obligation to maintenance is generally subject to certain conditions.”
According to the verdict, the child must first be in need. If the child possesses independent means sufficient for his or her own support, the father’s duty arises to provide maintenance.
“Secondly, the child should not be able to serve because of minorities or inability. Thirdly, the father must possess the means to provide such maintenance, ‘” said it.
The judgment noted that although most Islamic schools agree that the father’s financial ability is a necessary prerequisite, the Hanafi school maintains that for children who are obliged to maintain, regardless of actual prosperity, provided the father has the capacity to serve.
It said that the mere fact that the father is not working, in the absence of serious mental or physical challenges, cannot be admitted as a valid reason for his failure to perform the obligation for maintenance to his children.
“In circumstances where the father lacks the means to provide maintenance and are unable to serve due to genuine restrictions, the duty to maintain the children may go to the mother if she is in a position of financial ease.
“If none of the parents possess sufficient funds, the obligation can extend to the fatherly grandfather, subject to his financial ability to support the children,” added it.
