PETITIONER Non-applicant ~- RESPONDENT Applicant " IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR w.P.[227)No.\%é[ OF 2011 3ingleBench / Sanjay Saloman S/o Late S.K. Saloman’, aged about 38 years, R/o New Shanti Nagar, Quarter Noam/203, Post Shankar Nagar, _ Raipur (C.G.) VERSUS Smt. Manisha Saloman W/o Sanjay Saloman, R/o Housing Board Colony, ‘ Saddu, L.I.G., House No. 1117, Sector—7, Saddu, Raipur (C.G.). WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR S.B: Hon’ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra Writ Petition (227) No. 1861/2011 Appcarance: Shri A.P. Sharma, counsel for the petitioner. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA ORAL ORDER (07.04201 l ) This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 9/02/2011 passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Raipur directing payment of Rs.2000/— as interim maintenance in favour of respondent/wife in proceeding under Section 125 ofCr.P.C. (2) Section 19 (1) and Section 19 (4) of Family Courts Act, 1984 are reproduced here as under: “l9. Appeal- (1) Save as provided in sub-section (2) and notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) or in any other law, an appeal shall lie non} every judgment or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Family Court to the High Court both on \ facts and on law. ,\ \ PETITIONER : Sanjay Saloman Versus RESPONDENT : Smt. Manisha Saloman r2, @ 19 (4) The High Court may, or of its own motion or otherwise, call for and examine the reoord of any proceeding in which the Family Court situate . within its jurisdiction passed an order under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) for the purpose of satisfying itself as to the correctness, legality or propriety of the order, not being an interlocutory order, and, as to t the'regularity of such proceeding.” (3) The impugned order which decides rights of the parties at the interim stage of the proceedings is an interim order and not an interlocutory order, therefore the said order is amenable to proceeding under Section 19 (4) ofthe Act, 1984. (4) In View of the above, the instant petition is dismissed as not maintainable. (5) Certihed copy of the impugned order be returned to the counsel for the petitioner on supplying xerox copy thereof; to enable him to prefer a duly constituted revision under Section 19 (4) of the Act, 1984. Sd/~ Prashant Kumar Mishra Judge