In the name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful
The Appeal Court – White Nile State
The Shari’a Panel
In front of the Honorable Judges,
Salah Al Dean Mahjoob Seed Ahmed………………….Chairman
Ibraheem Mohammed Ali Al Tabji.……………………..Member
Hamed Al Ameen Abdullah.dam………………………….Member
Appealing Applicant: Suliman Khatir Mohammed
/Against/
Respondent: Salma Bushra Adam
Number: A.S. SH/97/2015
The Decision:
Rabak Court – the Department of Personal Status, on 8/6/2015, made a judgment in the presence, and
in favor, of the respondent /Against/ the Appealing Applicant to the effect that, the Appealing Applicant
is ordered to pay: the amount of 450 Pounds a month towards child support for his daughter: Sereen,
11/2 years old; plus the amount of 300 Pounds towards child clothing, each four passing months; plus a
six-months back-dated amount of 3300 Pounds, after deducting 550 Pounds and deducting the amount
of 1200 towards a divorce alimony settlement; plus the amount of 2400 Pounds towards a marriage
Motaa alimony.
The Appealing Applicant was not satisfied with the passed judgment, and therefore, on 23/6/2015,
through his attorney Hawah Salih Abdullah, he filed the following appeal; on his defense argument he
claimed that the Court of the Subject Mater did not take into consideration, nor appreciated the
financial status of the Appealing Applicant, and that of his other family members, as he believes the
amounts are too high. [The Attorney] argued that since the Appealing Applicant is employed as a clerk
with Al Nono company, and that he is married to a [second] wife, with children; and that his monthly
salary is only 850 Pounds, as evidently shown in the enclosed hearing report, the Appealing party is of
the opinion that the court should not rule in favor of the Back-dated payment of alimony, on the
grounds that the respondent had already received previous alimony payment; he thus requested a
revocation of the Subject Matter Court Decision.
The Respondent had been notified of the Appeal through a copy of the Petition, and her response came
through her legal representative Mr. Abdullah Mohammed Omer who argued for the validity of the
Subject Matter Court’s Decision. He furthermore added that the applicant is not just an ordinary clerk at
the company, but he is in fact the manager of Al Nono Export and Import Company; and that the
amount estimated by the Subject Matter Court is thus considered reasonable, given the applicant’s
income. The [legal representative] thus requested the appeal to be rejected, and to the original decision
the Subject Matter Court to stand binding.
We accepted the Appeal Request in form, in accordance with article 165/1973 A.M, Year 1983, as it was
presented within the permissible timeframe.

Select target paragraph3