1 CRA 36/09 abs FARAD CONTINUATION IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL REVISION APPLICATION NO. 36 OF 2009 ­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Orders Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's Orders Mr. P.B. Deo for the applicants. Ms. Vrunda Surve i/b Mr. P.P. Killedar for the respondents. CORAM : D.G. KARNIK, J. DATE : 8TH DECEMBER 2010 P.C. : 1. Heard. 2. By this revision application, the applicants challenge the order of interim maintenance whereby the applicant no.1 (defendant no.2) was directed to pay Rs.1000/­ per month towards interim maintenance to the respondent nos.1 and 2 (plaintiff nos.1 and 2). 3. Even if the revision application were to be allowed, that would not dispose off the lis. 2 CRA 36/09 Hence, by reason of proviso to section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure, revision application is not maintainable as held by this Court in Rajabhau Mahadeorao Rahate v. Dinkar Shantaram Ingole, 2002 (3) M.L.J. 921. 4. The revision application is disposed off as not maintainable. (D.G. KARNIK, J.)