IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.21753 of 2011 Ramajee Chaudhary Versus Ram Pukari Devi ---------------------------------- 02. 09.12.2011. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. The husband-petitioner has challenged the order dated 22.09.2011 passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Gopalganj in Matrimonial Case No.6 of 2002 whereby the Court below directed the petitioner to pay Rs.74,400/- as arrears of maintenance to the respondent within one month. It appears that by terms of order dated 09.10.2004 on the application under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the petitioner was directed to pay Rs.1200/- per month as maintenance to the respondent but the petitioner did not pay the respondent and, therefore, the respondent was compelled to file execution case No.1 of 2005 but then also the petitioner did not comply the order passed by the Court below under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Now, therefore, the arrears has mounted up to Rs.74,400/-. The Principal Judge has directed the petitioner to pay such arrears. I do not find any jurisdictional error in the impugned order; therefore, the same cannot be interfered with in - 2 - supervisory jurisdiction. The petitioner submitted that either installment may be fixed or the time granted by the Court below may be extended. In supervisory jurisdiction, this also cannot be done by this Court. The petitioner may file appropriate application before the Court below and if such application is filed the Court below shall consider it according to law. Thus, this writ application is dismissed. Sanjeev/- (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)