Versus Si&gh Sandhu, S/o. Harbhajan Siagh Saadhu, aged about 34 years, r,'o. Viilage No.2,' Nea.r Shivm.aadir, Fafadih, Raipur, P.s.Gani, Tahsil aiid Distt. Raipur (CG) 1,1 ,.l<i SEit. Parsaajeet Kaur, W/o. Preetaia Sitig.fa Sandhu, aged about 30 years, r/o. Chhota Ashok Nagar, Gudiyari, P.S. Oudiyari, Raipur (CG) Shri. Sukbdev Singh Saudhu, S/o. Preetam Singh Sandhu, aged about 9 nionths, miaor through natural guardian motiier Paramjeet Kaur, W/o. Preetam Singh Saadhu, r/o. Chhota Asliok Nagar, Gudiyari. Raipur (CG) iV*^i ••-<. tjresent: Shri Ragbavendra Pradhaa, couitsel for fhe appUcaiit. Ms. DeepaM Patidey, counsel for the respondents. The applicaat, beiug aggrieved by fhe order dated 23.01.2006 passed by tlie First Additional Priacipal Judge, Family Coiu-t-in MJC No. 220/2005, whereby iaterim. mauitenaace of Rs. 500/- to the non-appKcaat No.l aad Rs. 1500/- to tiie a.on-applicant No.2 was awarded. It is argued on behalf of the applicsiit that the order iB. not uiterlocutory' and fhe revision is inauitaiiiable. Reliaace is placed on Sunil Sumnr Sa&hsiruxil <uid Others, 1981 Cr.L.J. 2056, whereia it. is held fiiat by fhe Division .Bench of Puiijab & Haryaaa Higb Court II ^^3 .\ that fhe order of urtnerini laaiiitenance donot fall uader tbe category of iateriocutory order aad fhe revisiou is laain.tam.able. Heard. Order impugaed perased. By the order iiapugned, considerin.g the iacoiae of non applicaat No. 1, fae trial Court has awarded iateriEi m.amtenauce of Rs. 500/- aud Rs. 1,500/^to non-applica&t No.2, who was aged ^•1 ^ '/./—.. about niae raonths on tJi6 'date of filing of ftie appUcation and at present he m.ay be aged abbut three years. Considering the age offh.e non-applicaat No.2 aad lookhig to fhe present cost of liviag aad also ia the Ught of liability of Rs. 1500/-, it appears to be Uttle bit excessive. Consequently, the petition is partly aUowed aad fhe iiiterim iiiaiatena&ce awarded to the non-applicaat No.2 is reduced to Rs. 1000/- per m.0nfh.. The trial Court is directed to decide the inatter expeditiously. The paities are directed to be pi^sent before fh.e trial Court for turther proceeduigs on 2.03.2008. It is m.ade clear fhat fhis observation will not affect tiie jnerits ofthe case. Sd/" . T.P.Shasma Judge