IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16552 of 2011 Pawan Kumar Versus Mrs. Sarita Kumari & Ors ---------------------------------- 02. 22.09.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 28.05.2011 passed by Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna in Matrimonial case No.410 of 2006 whereby the learned Court below directed the petitioner to pay Rs.2500/- as ad-interim maintenance to the respondent under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act in matrimonial case. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the parties adduced evidence in the Court below. The petitioner also examined himself as P.W.1 in the case. The wife-respondent also examined two witnesses. It further appears that some documents were also filed and after appreciation of the evidences, the Court below directed the petitioner to pay the said amounts as stated above. In various decisions of the Apex Court, - 2 - such as 2010 (8) Supreme Court cases 329 and also 2003 (6) Supreme Court cases 675, 2010 (9) Supreme Court cases 385, the Apex Court has held that the High Court in exercise of supervisory jurisdiction will not convert itself into a Court of appeal and indulge in re-appreciation or evaluation of evidence or correct errors in drawing inferences or correct error of mere formal or technical characters. It has also been held that this supervisory jurisdiction is not available only to correct the mistake of fact or mistake of law. I, therefore, find no reason to interfere with the impugned order as the impugned order is based on evidence. Accordingly, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)