IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1320 of 2010 Raj Kishore Pandey, son of late Ugam Pandey, resident of village- Matiyariya, P.S. Harsidhi, District- East Champaran. .. Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Sabita Devi, w/o Raj Kishore Pandey, resident of village- Matiyariya, P.S. Harsidhi, Distt. East Champaran. .. Opp. Parties. ----------- 2. 29.11.2011 The husband- petitioner has preferred this revision application under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act against the order dated 19.7.2010 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, East Champaran at Motihari in Maintenance Case No. 45 of 2010 by which the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1500/- per month as interim maintenance to opposite party no. 2 and her minor daughter. The main grievance of the petitioner is that the petitioner is unable to pay the amount of maintenance as he has no capacity to pay. He has also filed a petition under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act against opposite party no. 2 for his maintenance as his wife- opposite party no. 2 is Asha Worker and earns Rs.2500/- per month besides she gets consolidated amount of Rs.250/- on each delivery. 2 Learned counsel for the State submits that Maintenance Case No. 45 of 2010 filed by opposite party no. 2 is pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court and the petitioner may raise his grievance as it cannot be entertained in this petition. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State and on perusal of material on record, it appears that the amount of maintenance is for ad interim maintenance and the main case is pending. Considering the facts and circumstances, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. The petitioner may raise his grievance before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court. This petition stands disposed of. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)