IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.387 of 2006 CHANDRADIP PRASAD Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 13 26.8.2008 This revision has been preferred against the order dated 19.1.2006 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna in Maintenance Case No.6(M) /04 thereby the petitioner has been directed to pay interim maintenance to opposite parties @ Rs.4000/- per month from the date of application i.e. 2.8.2004. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has no objection to pay current maintenance and he is actually paying the same since the day of the order. However, the petitioner is unable to pay arrear of interim maintenance which comes more than eighty thousand. Upon consideration of the facts and circumstances as well as reasoning mentioned in the impugned order I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned order. Accordingly, this revision application is hereby rejected. However, the petitioner is directed to pay interim maintenance only from the date of the order and not from the date of application. Payment of maintenance prior to the impugned order shall be considered at the final disposal of the case. The court below is directed to dispose of the main application within four months of receipt/production of a copy of this order on the basis of day today inquiry without giving any unnecessary adjournment to either party. B.Jha (Ghanshyam Prasad)