THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1410 OF 2009 24TH AUGUST 2009 BETWEEN: C.MURALIKRISHNA RAO . PETITIONER AND SMT.C.LAJVANTHI AND OTHERS . RESPONDENTS THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1410 OF 2009 O R D E R : This Criminal Revision Case is directed against the order dated 18-8-2009 in Crl.M.P.No.578 of 2009 in D.V.C.No.1 of 2009 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court cum XI Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, L.B.Nagar, Ranga Reddy District, whereby and where under the learned Magistrate granted interim maintenance of Rs.9,000/- per month to R1 and R2 herein towards their food, clothes, medical, household and school fee. 2. The petitioner is the husband and R1 is the wife. R2 herein is their child. The marriage between the parties is not in dispute and so also the birth of the child out of the wedlock. The wife filed D.V.C.No.1 of 2009 and moved Crl.M.P.No.578 of 2009 seeking interim monetary relief of Rs.30,000/- per month and also Rs.9,00,000/- as arrears for a period of two years six months towards maintenance. 3. The husband filed counter resisting the application filed by the wife. The learned Magistrate, on considering the material brought on record and on hearing the parties, awarded Rs.9,000/- per month as monetary relief for the wife and child by the order dated 18.8.2009. Hence, this revision by husband. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused impugned order under revision. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the lower court has no jurisdiction to grant interim monetary relief and therefore the order impugned in this revision is liable to be set aside. 6. I express my inability to accede to the contention advanced by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in view of Section 23(1) of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. Section 23(1) of the Act reads as under: “ In any proceeding before him under this Act, the Magistrate may pass such interim order as he deems just and proper” A plain reading of the above referred provision states that the Magistrate is to grant interim relief. 7. It is nextly contended by learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the quantum of amount fixed by the learned Magistrate is on high side and therefore the amount is required to be reduced considerably. 8. Since the main D.V.C. is pending consideration before the trial Court, I am not inclined to adjudicate upon the merits of the case. As the very D.V.C. is required to be disposed of within 60 days by the trial Court, I deem it appropriate to dispose of this revision with a direction to the trial Court to dispose of the D.V.C. within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the parties extending their cooperation. 9. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is disposed of. 24th AUGUST, 2009 ( B.SESHASAYANA REDDY,J) TNB THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B.SESHASAYANA REDDY CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1410 OF 2009 24TH AUGUST 2009.