IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1167 of 2009 BINDHYACHAL SINGH, S/o late Hari Narayan Singh, R/o village Padumker, P.S. Patahi, District East Champaran …. Petitioner Versus MOST.SANGEETA SINGH@SANGITA W/o late Sanjay Singh, R/o village Padumker, P.S. Patahi, District East Champaran … Oppostie Party For the petitioner : Mr. Satyavrat Verma, Advocate For the Opp. Party : None 2 21.01.2010 Heard Mr. Satyavrat Verma, learned counsel for the petitioner. This civil revision is directed against the order dated 4.6.2009 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Motihari in Matrimonial Case No. 84 of 2009, whereby ad- interim maintenance of Rs. 2,000/-(rupees two thousand) per month have been awarded in the aforesaid matrimonial case to the opposite party. The question arises in this case as to whether the forum of civil revisional jurisdiction of this Court would be available for challenging the impugned order. Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly submits that in view of the law laid down by this Court in Jagdish Pd. Chouhan v. Bhuneshwar Chouhan and anr., reported in 2009(4) BBCJ, 442 the civil revision may not be - 2 - maintainable, however, it is further submitted that even if there is bar under section 19(5) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter to be referred to as “the Act”) for filing any revision against any judgment, order or decree other than which has been described in section 19 of the Act itself, there should not be a bar on challenge being made under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or any other remedy available to the petitioner under law. This goes without saying that if any remedy is available to the petitioner under any statute, no liberty is necessary to be granted for availing the same. In the above view of the matter, respectfully relying upon the decision rendered in the case of Jagdish Pd. Chouhan (supra), I hold that this civil revision is not maintainable. Accordingly, the same is dismissed. However, it is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion with regard to the merit of the respective cases of the parties. Spd/- (Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.) -----------