Quick answer: On October 3, 2026, the Lahore High Court ruled that nan-nufqa (child maintenance) is an absolute right of minor children — it cannot be reduced, waived, or surrendered even with the mutual consent of the parents. Neither parents nor guardians have the authority to give up this right. Any divorce or khula agreement that cuts a child's maintenance is unenforceable.

What did the Lahore High Court actually decide on October 3, 2026?

Saturday's ruling was short on drama and long on consequence. Justice Usman Ghani Rashid Cheema, hearing a petition filed by a woman named Shazia Noreen after the couple's divorce, declared that maintenance for minor children is their absolute right. Not a favour. Not a concession the father grants when he feels like it. A right.

And here is the part that will change thousands of cases: the court held that this maintenance cannot be reduced or abolished — even with the mutual consent of the parents. Neither parents nor guardians, the judgment says, possess the authority or right to surrender or diminish maintenance amounts.

Read that slowly. It means a father and mother cannot sit across a table, shake hands, and agree that Rs 8,000 a month is "enough" for their two children when the father's income supports Rs 40,000. It means a khula compromise deed with a maintenance clause cannot shrink a child's entitlement. The right belongs to the child. The parents are simply not its owners — so they cannot sell it, waive it, or bargain it away.

Who was the case about — and why did it reach the High Court?

As reported by ARY News, the petition was filed by Shazia Noreen following her divorce. The details of the full judgment are still emerging — this was a Saturday ruling, and the detailed written order will carry the court's complete reasoning. But the core facts are clear from the reports: a divorced mother approached the High Court over her children's maintenance, and the court used the occasion to settle a question that haunts family courts across Punjab.

This is the question: in divorce after divorce, settlement after settlement, parents agree to maintenance figures that the child's actual needs never agreed to. Sometimes the mother accepts a low figure because she wants the divorce finalized quickly. Sometimes the father pressures the family into signing. Sometimes both sides are simply exhausted and write down whatever number ends the fight. For years, fathers have walked into Family Courts waving these compromise deeds, arguing: "We settled this. She agreed." Saturday's ruling answers that argument directly.

What is "nan-nufqa" — and where does the father's duty come from?

Nan-nufqa is the Urdu term for the maintenance a father owes his children: food, clothing, shelter, education, and medical care. It is not a modern invention and it is not charity. Under Muslim personal law — which applies in Pakistan through the West Pakistan Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1962 — the father is the natural guardian of his minor children, and maintaining them is his legal, moral, and religious obligation.

Mere tajurbe me aksar, clients are surprised by how absolute this duty is. The father's obligation does not pause because the marriage ended. It does not shrink because he remarried and has "new expenses." It does not disappear because the mother has a job, or because her own father helps out. The duty runs from father to child, directly — and the October 3 ruling has now put the High Court's stamp on that directness: the right sits with the child, which is exactly why no adult can negotiate it away on the child's behalf.

Suits for maintenance are filed in the Family Court under the Family Courts Act, 1964. The court fixes a monthly amount, and it can also grant interim maintenance — a temporary amount payable while the case is still being heard, because children cannot wait a year for dinner.

Why can't parents just agree to reduce it? What's the legal logic?

Think about it this way. A five-year-old cannot sign a contract. She cannot appoint a lawyer. She cannot even tell the court she is hungry. Everything in her case is done by adults speaking for her — the mother usually files through a next friend, and the court speaks for her interests.

Now ask the obvious question: if the adults speaking for her can also give away her rights, what protection does she actually have? None. That is the logic the Lahore High Court has now stated plainly. A guardian's job is to protect the minor's rights, not to dispose of them. A mother who signs away her child's maintenance in a compromise deed is not exercising a right — she is surrendering someone else's.

Aksar log ye ghalti karte hain: they treat the compromise deed like a final receipt — "case closed, everyone agreed." Family law does not work like a shop transaction. Courts have always treated a minor's maintenance as a recurring cause of action: each month the child is not maintained is a fresh wrong. That is why earlier decisions have held that a past settlement does not bar a fresh suit, and the doctrine of res judicata — "this matter was already decided" — does not apply to a child's ongoing maintenance. Saturday's ruling fits squarely into this line: the child's right is alive every single month.

In fact, this is not the first time the Lahore High Court has said something like this. In an earlier ruling reported by Everything.pk, Justice Mohsin Akhtar Kayani dismissed a father's petition against maintenance decrees in favour of a minor, Naseer Akhtar Awan, filed through his mother Sadia Awan. The father, Akhtar Hussain Awan, argued that a 2007 compromise — under which Rs 60,000 had been paid and the parties agreed not to raise future claims — barred a later 2019 suit. The court rejected that completely: agreements preventing minors from enforcing future maintenance rights are void, past claims can be settled but the ongoing right cannot be waived during the child's dependency. Different case, same principle — and now it has the October 2026 judgment's reinforcement.

How does this change divorce and khula settlements in practice?

This is where the ruling bites. Walk into any Family Court in Lahore, Multan, or Faisalabad on any given Monday and you will find compromise deeds — divorce settlements, khula agreements — with maintenance clauses written at whatever figure the negotiations produced. Some are fair. Many are not. A few are frankly shocking: Rs 5,000 a month for two school-going children from a father earning six figures.

From now on, here is what changes:

For mothers signing settlements: Do not accept a maintenance figure just to get the divorce over with. If you already did, know this — the clause is vulnerable. Your child can still approach the court for proper maintenance, and the father cannot hide behind your signature. The October 3 ruling says, in effect, that you never had the power to sign that right away in the first place.

For fathers relying on settlements: That deed does not protect you. If the figure is below what a court would fix, the mother (or the child's guardian) can file a fresh suit and the court will assess the amount afresh — looking at your actual income, not the number in the deed. You will be asked about salary slips, business income, bank statements. Paying "as per the agreement" and stopping there is now a documented path to arrears piling up against you.

For the panchayat-and-elders route: Village and family elders settle maintenance disputes all the time — with good intentions and zero legal force. A panchayat's decision cannot override a child's statutory right, and this ruling makes that even harder to argue. If elders fixed Rs 10,000 and the court later fixes Rs 35,000, the court wins. Every time.

How do family courts actually decide the amount?

No statute gives a fixed formula — and that confuses people. So let me explain what judges actually look at, because Mere tajurbe me aksar, this is the part of the case clients understand least.

The court weighs three things together:

  1. The father's real income. Not what he declares on a self-made affidavit — his salary slip, his business, his bank activity, his lifestyle. Courts are not naive about under-declared income. A man who drives a new car and sends his second wife's children to an elite school will not convince a judge he earns Rs 40,000.
  2. The children's reasonable needs. School fees, uniforms, books, transport, food, clothing, medical expenses, and a standard of living consistent with what the father can afford. Courts expect receipts — school fee challans, medical bills, grocery estimates. Vague claims get vague results.
  3. The child's circumstances. Age, health, special needs, the city they live in. Maintaining a child in Lahore or Karachi costs more than in a small town, and courts know it.

What do the numbers look like in practice? These are rough, experience-based ranges, not legal guarantees — every case turns on its own evidence. In Punjab's Family Courts, interim maintenance for a lower-income family often lands around Rs 8,000–15,000 per child per month. Middle-income families commonly see Rs 20,000–40,000 per child. Where the father is well-off — a doctor, a businessman, someone earning abroad — Rs 50,000 to over Rs 1,00,000 per child per month is not unusual. And here is something many parents do not know: family courts routinely add a 10% annual increase clause to decrees, so the amount grows with inflation instead of freezing while prices climb.

One more practical point. Interim maintenance usually comes fast — often within 4–8 weeks of filing, sometimes sooner. The court does not make children wait for the final decree, which in contested cases can take 6–12 months and occasionally 1–2 years. Ask for interim maintenance in your very first application. Too many mothers file the suit and forget to ask for the interim order, then struggle for months. Do not be that case.

What should mothers do right now? A practical checklist

If you are a divorced or separated mother reading this, here is what the ruling means for your next steps. Do not rush — but do not sit still either.

1. Dig out your settlement papers. Find the divorce deed, the khula decree, the compromise — whatever document mentions maintenance. Read the exact figure. Then ask yourself honestly: does this cover my children's school fees, food, and medical? If it clearly does not, that document is now weaker than the day you signed it.

2. File (or re-file) in the Family Court. A suit for maintenance is filed in the Family Court of the district where you or the children live. You file as the children's next friend — the case is theirs, you are their voice. Ask for interim maintenance in the same application. Bring your evidence of the father's income if you have it (even a photo of his salary slip, a visiting card showing his business, vehicle registration details — anything helps the court assess reality).

3. Do not let anyone talk you out of it. "Larkion ke kaam adalat me nahi hote." "Bachay baap ke khilaf case karenge to badnaam hoge." You will hear all of this. The Lahore High Court has now said, in the clearest possible terms, that your children's maintenance is their absolute right. Claiming a right is not a disgrace. Starving quietly is not dignity.

4. Keep records from today. Every school fee challan, every medical bill, every receipt for uniforms and books. Courts decide on paper, not on tears. A mother who walks in with a file of receipts gets a better result than one who walks in with only a story. Both matter — but the file wins.

5. Do not sign anything new under pressure. If the father's family is now rushing you to sign a fresh "agreement" with a low figure — because they have heard about this ruling too — understand that their urgency is their problem, not yours. No signature of yours can reduce your child's right anyway. That is literally what the High Court just said.

What should fathers know? The honest version

This article is not only for mothers. Fathers deserve straight talk too — and Mere tajurbe me aksar, the fathers who listen early save themselves enormous trouble later.

First: the ruling does not punish you. It prices the duty correctly. If you are already paying a fair amount — one that covers your children's real needs in line with your income — this judgment changes nothing for you. Keep paying, keep receipts, and you have nothing to fear.

Second: stop paying "as per the panchayat" and hoping it counts. If a court later fixes a higher amount, the difference becomes arrears — and arrears do not vanish. They accumulate month after month, and courts enforce them. I have seen fathers discover, two years into a case, that they owe Rs 8–10 lakh in arrears they never budgeted for. That shock is avoidable.

Third: pay through traceable channels. Bank transfer, every month, with the reference "child maintenance." Cash handed over at the gate with no receipt is the single most expensive habit in family litigation. When the mother says "he never paid" and you say "I paid cash," the court believes the paper. There is no paper. You lose.

Fourth: if the amount genuinely exceeds your means, say so in court — with proof. Courts are not unreasonable. If your income genuinely fell — a closed business, a lost job, a medical crisis — the court can reassess. What the court will not accept is a shrug and a claim of poverty from a man with an undeclared second income. Bring your bank statements and make your case honestly.

Fifth: the annual increase is normal. Do not be alarmed when a decree includes a 10% yearly rise. It is standard practice, and fighting it burns legal fees for nothing.

What if maintenance was already reduced by an agreement? Can you reopen it?

Yes — and this is the most important practical question of the whole ruling. Let me answer it in plain steps.

The old agreement does not block a new suit. Because a minor's maintenance is a recurring cause of action, each unpaid or underpaid month is a fresh claim. The legal doctrine that normally stops re-litigation — res judicata — does not apply to a child's ongoing maintenance. So even if a compromise deed was signed three years ago, even if a court earlier recorded that compromise, a fresh suit for proper maintenance can still be filed today.

The reduction clause is unenforceable. This is the heart of the October 3 ruling. A clause that says "the mother accepts Rs 10,000 and waives all future claims" is exactly the kind of clause the Lahore High Court has now declared beyond any parent's power to make. The court will simply ignore it when fixing the real amount.

What to do, concretely: File a fresh suit for maintenance in the Family Court, attach a copy of the old agreement (it is evidence of the father's admission that some maintenance was due — use it against him), and ask for interim maintenance immediately. Bring proof of the children's current needs and the father's current income. The court fixes the amount from scratch.

One warning, though. Do not stop an existing court decree on your own. If a Family Court already fixed Rs 25,000 and you believe the October ruling entitles your child to more, you file for enhancement — you do not simply declare the old decree dead. Until a court changes an order, the order stands. Work through the court, not around it.

Common mistakes parents make in maintenance cases

Aksar log ye ghalti karte hain — and I watch the same errors repeat in court corridors every week:

  • Accepting verbal promises. "Main kharcha dunga, case wapas lo." The case is withdrawn, the promises evaporate, and there is no order to enforce. Never withdraw a maintenance suit on a verbal promise. Get the commitment written into a court order or keep the case alive.
  • Signing compromise deeds without reading the maintenance clause. In divorce negotiations, everyone focuses on mehr, dowry articles, and custody — and the maintenance figure gets scribbled in as an afterthought. That afterthought now has a High Court ruling attached to it. Read it. Question it.
  • Waiting too long. Delay does not kill the claim — the right is recurring — but delay does hurt the children in the meantime, and it weakens interim relief. File early.
  • Demanding fantasy amounts. Claiming Rs 2 lakh a month from a father earning Rs 80,000 does not make you look strong; it makes the court doubt your whole case. Claim what the evidence supports. Courts respect honest arithmetic.
  • Not asking for interim maintenance. I said it before; I will say it again because this single omission costs families months of unpaid expenses. Ask in the first application.
  • Paying or receiving in cash. Already covered above — for fathers, no receipt means no payment in the court's eyes. For mothers, cash received without record can later be denied by no one, but it also cannot be proved if the father claims he overpaid. Bank transfers protect both sides.
  • Letting relatives "settle" it. The panchayat, the biradari elders, the well-meaning uncle — their settlements have whatever moral weight your family gives them and zero legal weight against a court decree. This ruling widens that gap further.

Documents checklist: what to carry to the Family Court

Walk into the Family Court prepared and your case starts ahead. Here is the file a good lawyer will ask you to build:

  • Children's B-Forms (from NADRA) — proof of age and parentage.
  • Your CNIC and the father's CNIC copy if available.
  • Nikahnama (marriage certificate) — establishes the marriage the children were born into.
  • Talaq deed, khula decree, or divorce certificate — establishes the marriage has ended.
  • The old compromise or settlement deed, if one exists — the court needs to see the clause you are challenging.
  • School fee challans for the last 6–12 months, plus admission receipts.
  • Medical bills and prescriptions — especially for any child with ongoing health needs.
  • Rent receipts or tenancy agreement — shelter is part of maintenance.
  • Father's income evidence — salary slip, employment letter, business visiting card, vehicle ownership, property records, even social media showing lifestyle (courts do look).
  • Utility bills (electricity, gas) — helps establish the household's real monthly cost.
  • Any prior court orders — interim orders, earlier decrees, execution proceedings.

Photocopies are fine for filing; keep originals safe for when the court asks to see them. Organize them month-wise. A judge who can flip through a neat file in two minutes forms a better impression than one handed a plastic bag of crumpled receipts.

Two stories this ruling changes

Sana from Multan — the agreement that wasn't enough. Sana divorced two years ago. In the settlement, exhausted and wanting the process over, she signed a deed fixing her ex-husband's maintenance at Rs 10,000 a month for their two children, aged 7 and 5. He is a bank officer in Multan earning roughly Rs 1.6 lakh a month. The children's school fees alone are Rs 14,000 a month; food, transport, and uniforms push the real cost past Rs 35,000. When Sana recently asked for more, he waved the deed at her: "Tum ne sign kiya tha." Under the October 3 ruling, that deed's maintenance clause is exactly what the High Court says no parent can validly agree to. Sana can file a fresh suit in the Family Court in Multan; the court will assess his Rs 1.6 lakh income against the children's documented needs and fix a proper amount — likely in the Rs 30,000–40,000 range for two children — plus interim maintenance within weeks. His deed protects him from nothing.

Imran from Karachi — the panchayat settlement. Imran runs a small workshop in Karachi. When his marriage ended, the biradari elders "settled" everything: maintenance fixed at Rs 15,000 a month for his two children, written on plain paper, signed by everyone. Imran paid it faithfully and considered the matter closed. Then his ex-wife filed in the Family Court. The court looked at his workshop income — around Rs 2.5 lakh a month — and the children's school and living costs, and fixed Rs 50,000 a month. The elders' paper did not survive first contact with the court, and the months of difference became arrears. Imran's lesson, and every father's: a panchayat cannot cap a child's right, and the only safe payment is the court-assessed one, made by bank transfer, every month. (Note: Karachi falls under the Sindh High Court's jurisdiction, but the principle the Lahore High Court has articulated reflects the consistent position of Pakistan's superior courts on a minor's maintenance — it is persuasive far beyond Punjab.)

Frequently asked questions

Can a mother reduce her child's maintenance in a divorce deed?

No — and that is precisely what the Lahore High Court has now confirmed. The right belongs to the child, not the mother. She can settle her own claims in a deed — her mehr, her iddat maintenance, her dowry articles — but she has no legal power to shrink her child's nan-nufqa. A clause that tries to do so is unenforceable, and the child can still claim the proper amount through the Family Court.

The father says "we compromised, the matter is closed." Is it?

Not for the child's maintenance. Courts treat a minor's maintenance as a recurring cause of action — every month of underpayment is a fresh claim. An earlier compromise, even one recorded by a court, does not bar a new suit for proper maintenance. The October 3 ruling strengthens this further: parents simply cannot bargain away what was never theirs to give.

Until what age must the father pay?

The general rule in Pakistan: sons until they reach majority (18), daughters until they are married. But real life is messier than rules. Courts commonly continue maintenance for unmarried daughters pursuing education, and for children with disabilities the duty can extend much longer. If the child is still studying and dependent, the court is unlikely to cut the amount off at some birthday.

Can maintenance be increased later if expenses grow?

Yes. File for enhancement in the Family Court — or, if no suit was ever filed, file a fresh suit. Children's needs grow: school fees rise, medical needs appear, inflation bites. That is why courts routinely build a 10% annual increase into decrees. A father whose income has also grown since the original order should expect the court to notice.

What if the father works abroad, in the Gulf or elsewhere?

Foreign income counts — and courts know that a man earning in riyals or dirhams is not a Rs 40,000-a-month earner. The court will assess his actual earning capacity, and maintenance figures in such cases are typically much higher. Hiding foreign income is also getting harder: bank records, remittance trails, and lifestyle evidence all speak in court.

What happens if the father simply refuses to pay the decree?

The decree is not a suggestion. The Family Court can enforce it through warrants of arrest, attachment of salary, attachment of bank accounts, and attachment of movable or immovable property. Fathers who ignore decrees sometimes learn this the hard way — through a knock on the door they did not expect. If you hold an unpaid decree, file for execution; the court has the tools.

Does the mother lose the maintenance if she remarries?

No. This is one of the most common misunderstandings I hear. The maintenance is the child's right, not the mother's. Her remarriage does not end the father's duty to his children — though custody arrangements may be revisited separately. The money follows the child, not the mother's marital status. Anyone telling you otherwise is confusing custody with maintenance.

Do I need a lawyer to file in the Family Court?

Legally, no — you can represent yourself. Practically, get one if you possibly can. Maintenance cases turn on evidence: income proof, expense documentation, interim applications, cross-examination. A lawyer who does family work knows exactly what the judge needs to see. If fees are a problem, ask at your District Courts' bar office — many district bar associations run free legal-aid cells for women and minors.

How fast can I get interim maintenance?

Faster than most people expect — often within 4–8 weeks of filing, sometimes sooner if the case is straightforward. That is why the very first application should always include the interim request. Children cannot eat "final decree in eight months." The court understands this, and the October 3 ruling's emphasis on the absolute nature of the right only reinforces the urgency.

The October 3, 2026 ruling will be quoted in Family Courts for years — not because it invented a new right, but because it finally said the quiet part out loud. A child's maintenance was never the parents' property to divide, discount, or sign away. It belongs to the child, absolutely, every month, until the child no longer needs it. If you are a mother holding a settlement deed that short-changes your children, you now hold a High Court judgment that says your signature never had the power you were told it had. And if you are a father, the message is equally clear: pay what is fair, pay it on record, pay it on time — because the one person in this dispute who cannot speak for themselves is the one the court has now spoken for.