IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1616 of 2009 Kalapnath Singh, son of late Ram Ekbal Singh, resident of village: Teliya, P.O.: Turkea, P.S.: Kurhni, District: Muzaffarpur. … Petitioner. Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. Pawan Devi, wife of Sri Kalapnath Singh, daughter of Hirday Prasad Singh. 3. Sobha Kumari, son of Kalapnath Singh, 4. Bablu Kumar, son of Kalapnath Singh 5. Pooja Kumari, son of Kalapnath Singh All residents of village : Telia P.S. Kurhni, District- Muzaffarpur. .. Opposite Parties. ----------- 2. 18.11.2011 The petitioner has preferred this revision application under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act against the order dated 23.6.2009 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Muzaffarpur in Maintenance Case No. 87 of 2004 by which the petitioner has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.1500/- only per month for the maintenance of his wife and three children opposite party nos. 2 to 5. The main contention of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner in unable to pay the amount of maintenance due to his poor earning. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of the impugned order it appears that it is an admitted fact that the petitioner is the husband of opposite party no. 2 2 and father of opposite party nos. 3 to 5 who are minor daughters and son. Both the parties have adduced evidence in support of their contention. Learned Principal Judge has considered the evidence adduced on behalf of both the parties and thereafter he has directed the petitioner to pay a sum of Rs.1500/- per month for maintenance of opposite party nos. 2 to 5, which is not excessive for the maintenance of four persons. Considering the facts and circumstances, I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. Kanchan (Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)