IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1642 of 2007 PAPPU KUMAR MODI Versus SMT.ANJU DEVI ----------- 2 28.8.2008 Heard Counsel for the petitioner. In the opinion of this Court, the amount of maintenance pendentelite of Rs. 2,000/- per month or Rs. 500/- by way of cost of litigation per month cannot be said to be either excessive or illegal. The source of income of the petitioner has been in fact discussed by the Court below which was required to be gone into for the prima facie satisfaction and once that has been done and the relationship of the husband and wife is admitted as well as the fact with regard to the pendency of a matrimonial case at the instance of the petitioner for divorce is not disputed, this Court would not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Counsel for the petitioner, however, seems to be correct that the matrimonial case must be disposed of at an early date. In that view of the matter, this Court would direct the Family Court to take up this case of the petitioner in its own turn but ensure that once this case is taken up, it is not unnecessarily adjourned and is decided expeditiously provided that the petitioner, the husband himself cooperates. 2 With the aforementioned observations and directions, this civil revision application is hereby disposed of. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)