IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1129 of 2009 FUJAIL AHMAD @ MUNNA S/O MD. ISRAIL IRAKI.@ MD. ISRAIL R/O MUHALLA HASANPURA, DIST. MAU (U.P.) ----PETITIONER Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR 2. TABASSUM KHATOON @ SALMA W/O FUJAIL AHMAD @ MUNNA D/O SK. MAKBUL HUSSAIN 3. SUJAIL AHMAD IRAKI S/O FUJAIL AHMAD @ MUNNA UNDER THE GUARDIANSHIP OF MOTHER TABASSUM KHATOON @ SALMA BOTH R/O MUHALLA HASANPURA P.S. KASAULI, DISST. MAU ( U.P.) AT PRESENT RESIDING AT RAMGARH P.S. RAMGARH, DISTT. KAIMUR BHABHUA (BIHAR) ---OPP.PARTIES. ----------- 02 09.07.2010 Heard both sides. Petitioner, who is husband, is aggrieved by the order dated 16.05.2009, passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Kaimur at Bhabhua in Misc. Case no. 39 of 2008. A brief statement of facts may first be indicated. Opposite party no.2 is wife of petitioner. She preferred Misc. case being case no. 32 of 2008 seeking maintenance from the husband. It appears that the petitioner filed appearance in the said proceeding but subsequently did not take steps to contest the same. Resultantly, the matter was decided ex-parte on 15.11.2008, whereby the petitioner was directed to pay a sum of Rs 10,000/- per month by way of maintenance. Husband/ petitioner subsequently filed an application under Section 126 of the Cr. P.C. for recall of order which gave rise to Misc. case no. 39 of 2008. During the pendency of this application, the wife/ (opposite party no.2) made an application seeking at-interim maintenance. On a consideration of the materials, learned Court below has passed an 2 order granting ad-interim maintenance to the tune of Rs. five thousand in favour of the wife/opposite party no.2 w.e.f. the date of filing of said application in Misc. case no. 39 of 2008. From a bare recital of the facts hereinabove, it would transpire that the order is ad-interim in nature. The matter has to be finally decided by the said Court. In that view of the matter, this Court declines from interfering with the order. Let it be recorded that learned counsel representing the opposite party no.2 stated before this Court that she shall have no objection in getting the issue(s) decided finally on merit in presence of both the parties. She, therefore, does not object to the application filed by the husband for recall of the order dated 15.11.2008. In that view of the matter, the Court below has to decide this issue finally on merit after giving opportunity to both the parties. Further the order impugned is ad-interim in nature. On this score also, this Court declines to interfere with the order. The application is, accordingly, disposed of. Sym ( Kishore K. Mandal, J.)