DMston Bench JA- IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHAmSGARH AT BILASPUR No. 5^- /2011. APPLICANT NON-APPLICANT \\ ^ 6^^?';:- y^-:^.--"' • ^ •'l\Eb.y--' \\\ '^:>^^ ^-•' 'vKXC Mohan, S/o. Awadhram Yadu, aged about 60 years, Agriculturist, R/o. Village Bitkuli, Police Station Karhi Bazar, R. I. Circle Nipniya, Tahsil Bhatapara, District Raipur (C. G.) VERSUS NON-APPLICANTS : 1. APPLICANTS Smt. Pramila, Wd/o. Rain KumarYadu, aged 30 years, 2. Ku. Nikita, D/o. late Ram Kumar Yadu, aged about 14 years, 3. Ku. Nidhi, D/o. late Ram Kumar Yadu, aged about 12 years, No. 2 SB 3 are Minors through : Natural Guardian, Mother Smt. Pramila, Wd/o. late Ram Kumar Yadu, All R/o. Village Katiya, Police Station Bemetara, Tahsil Berla, District Durg(C.G.) <0_ J TP<1< fl FS»T /^e^LtM,s.)t'rvl' e«^li »L^^^^WIUNDER SECTION 19 f|OF THE FAMILY COURT'S ACT EIST^ DIVISION BENCH: .M.QUDDUS! & F,A.(M).No. Resoondents Vs Mohan Smt. Pramila & others Present: Mr. Devesh Chandra Verma, Advocate for the appetlant. Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, Advocate for the respondents. st (1s'November,2011) 1. Heard. 2. The appellant had filed this misceilaneous appeal against the order dated 26.2.2011 passed in Misc. Civil Suit No.04/2010 whereby the learned Principai Judge, Family Court, Durg granted interim maintenance of Rs.1,000/-, 800/- & 800/- respectiveiy to the respondents herein. 3. Facts of the case, in brief, are that in the year 1991 the respondent No.1 was married to son of the appellant herein nameiy Ramkumar and out of their wedlock, respondent No.2 & 3 were born. Said Ramkumar died on 13.11.1998. The respondents have filed an appiication under Section 19 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 before the Court below seeking maintenance on the ground that the appellant is in possession of joint property of the family which includes share of deceased Ramkumar and as such, he is liable to maintain them. During pendency of the case, the Court beiow vlde order dated 26.2.2011 directed the appeilant herein to pay Rs.1,000/-, Rs.800/- •& Rs.800/- respectively to the respondents herein as maintenance against which the appellant has filed this appeal. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. We have a!so perused the record of the Court beiow. 5. As there is jointproperty of the appellant and the respondente herein, at present we are not inclined to interfere with the order impugned. However, we dispose of this appeal with a direction to the Court below to take a final decision as early as possible, preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the certified copy ofthis order. The Registry is directed to sendjaack the records ^tihe case withodt any further delay. SdA • ! I.M.Quddusi Judge Sd/- G. Minhajuddin Judge .^L