IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. NO.884 OF 2007 MANOJ PRASAD, S/O BISHUNDEO PRASAD @ AWADHESH PRASAD, R/O VILLAGE BARAKHURD, POLICE STATION NOORSARAI, DISTRICT NALANDA. …………………PETITIONER. VERSUS SUNITA DEVI W/O FO MANOJ PRASAD, D/O MADAN MAHTO,R/O VILLAGE RAGHUBIGHA, POLICE STATION NALANDA, DISTRICT NALANDA. ………………………RESPONDENTS. ----------- 03/ 14.09.2011 Heard counsel for the petitioner. This Civil Revision application, which has been restored today, is directed against the order of the Court below, whereby and whereunder, it has awarded a sum of Rs. 8000/- towards the legal expenses in terms of Section-24 of the Hindu Marriages Act. Though the counsel for the petitioner has tried to justify the filing of the Civil Review application by taking a plea that the husband of the petitioner himself was a student, this Court on appreciation of the pleadings on record would find that if such husband of the petitioner could enter into a marriage and thereafter also go for a divorce coercing his wife to contest her litigation, the direction of the Court below for payment of litigation expenses 2 would not be contrary to the provisions of law. Section-24 itself envisages such payment of legal expenses. The quantum of Rs. 8000/- as a whole for contesting the entire divorce case is also not exhorbitant taking into account that the opposite party has been allowed only a sum of Rs. 800/- per month as interim maintenance under Section-24 of the Act which would be insufficient also for meeting legal expenses of the pending case against her. Thus, this Court would find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. That being so, this application is wholly misconceived and is, accordingly, dismissed. Ranjan (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)