IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1353 of 2008 Arvind Kumar Prasad @ Arvind Kumar, son of Sri Rajendra Prasad Probationary Officer in Dena Bank, Lodi Road Branch New Delhi, resident of Mohalla B-7 Ist Floor Safdarjang Enclave Extension P.S. Sarojninagar, New Delhi. … Petitioner. Versus Smt. Geeta Prasad, wife of Sri Arvind Kumar Prasad, Daughter of Sri Maheshwar Das A/P resident of Mohalla Kankarbagh Colony, M.I.G. Flat No. 287, P.O. Lohia Nagar, P.S. Kankarbagh, District- Patna. … Opposite party. ----------- 3. 22.07.2011 The husband-petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 25.8.2008 passed by learned Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, Patna in Maintenance Case No. 73 (M)/2007 by which he has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- per month to his wife, opposite party as an ad- interim maintenance. Heard Mr. Gajendra Kumar Jha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the record, it appears that by the impugned order the learned court below has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.5000/- per month as interim maintenance to opposite party. It has been stated at the Bar 2 that maintenance case is pending for final hearing and evidence on behalf of wife, opposite party has already been completed. Now the petitioner has to produce his evidence and thereafter the final order will be passed. It appears from the order dated 21.7.2010 passed by this Court that during the pendency of this application the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs.2500/- in favour of opposite party and it has been further directed that six months from today, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner in connection with maintenance case no. 73(M)/2007 subject to continued payment of the aforesaid amount. It has been contended on behalf of opposite party that the order for payment of ad-interim maintenance was passed on 25.8.2008 by the learned Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court and an interim order was passed by this Court on 21.7.2010. The matter of payment between period i.e. 25.8.2008 to 21st July 2010 is still open. It is made clear that this Court has not considered regarding the amount of interim maintenance. Since the maintenance case is 3 pending for final order, no adequacy or inadequacy has been considered by this Court. It will be open to the learned court below to consider the matter of maintenance in accordance with law and pass order within a period of three months. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner will co-operate with the Court. With the aforementioned observation and direction, this petition stands disposed of. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)