MUSLIM FAMILY COURTS ORDINANCE, 1985

 Section 5(d)–

Whatever be the meaning of Mataa it is certainly not maintenance as can be claimed within the meaning of maintenance under the Family Courts Ordinance.

Hefzur  Rahman (Md) vs Shamsun Nahar Begum and another 51 DLR (AD) 172.

Section 5(d)–

There is a clear direction in respect of a pregnant woman who has been divorced and the direction is to bear her expenses till she has delivered. In the case of such a woman her period of lddat will be till delivery. It is apparent that the maintenance has been related to the period of lddat.

Hefzur Rahman (Md) vs Shamsun Nahar Begum 51 DLR (AD) 172.

Section 6(4)–

In the name of granting general or other relief the Court cannot and would not mount any surprise on the defendant and make him liable for something which does not arise out of the plaint and, as such, he had no occasion to answer the same. This is merely an extension of the principle of natural justice (ATM Afzal CJ).

Hefzur Rahman (Md) vs Shamsun Nahar Begum and another 51 DLR (AD) 172.

Section 7(1)(3)(5)–

The Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961 when interpreted in the light of Articles 8 and 8(1A) of the Constitution preserves iddat as laid down in the Holy Qur–an : (Mustafa Kamal J).

Hefzur Rahman (Md) vs Shamsun Nahar Begum 51 DLR (AD) 172.