IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA Cr.M.M.O. No.15 of 2011. Date of decision: 12.05.2011 Smt.Kiran Bala … …Petitioner Versus Sanjeev Kumar … …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 No. For the Petitioner: Mr.Ajay Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.N.K. Thakur, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud,J. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner against the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Una in Revision challenging the order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Court No.2, Amb, District Una, vide which it allowed the interim maintenance to the wife at the rate of Rs.1000/- per month from 1.2.2010 till the disposal of the main petition. 2. The reading of the order shows that no final determination has been made by the Courts below and it is only an interim measure by which the petitioner herein has been granted maintenance. The revision 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? Yes. 2 preferred before the learned Additional Sessions Judge challenges the quantum awarded to the petitioner herein. The learned appellate Court holds that it is an interlocutory order which cannot be challenged in revision. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner urges that in view of the settled position of the law, the order cannot be described as interlocutory. 4. I am not entering into this aspect of the case as it is only interim maintenance which was granted and it will be open to the petitioner herein to urge on the quantum of maintenance when the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. preferred by her is finally disposed of by the Court below. 5. This petition is disposed of with a direction to the learned trial Court to dispose of the petition at the earliest possible considering the fact which relates with the award of maintenance. No order as to costs. May 12, 2011. (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.