IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1639 of 2009 Full Mohammad, S/o Late Abdul Mian, resident of Karamchand Balra, P.S.- Kurhani, Distt.- Muzaffarpur. ………Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Shadrun Khatoon, D/O Tattahar Mian, R/O Vill.- Dharampur, P.S.- Muzaffarpur (Sadar), Distt.- Muzaffarpur. …….Opposite Parties. ----------- 2. 21.11.2011 This application has been filed under Section 19 (4) of the Family Courts Act against the order dated 19.08.2009 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarpur in Maintenance Case No.113/2006 by which the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1000/-per month to his wife, opposite party no.2 for her maintenance. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that he is ready to lead conjugal life with the opposite party no.2 and is also to ready to maintain her. He has no capacity to pay a sum of Rs.1000/-per month to his wife, opposite party no.2. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State as also on perusal of the material on record, it appears that it is admitted fact that petitioner is the husband of opposite 2 party no.2. The petitioner has performed the second marriage. Thereafter, he has been neglecting the first wife, opposite party no.2. It further appears that evidence has been led on behalf of both the parties and after considering the pleadings and evidence on behalf of the both the parties, the impugned order has been passed directing the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1000/-per month to his wife, opposite party no.2. The amount of maintenance is not excessive. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)