HONBLE J.J.MUNIR,J. - (1.) This is a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, challenging an order of Ms. Reeta Gupta, Principal Judge, Family Court, Jalaun at Orai, dated 05.02.2020 granting interim maintenance to the wife under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
(2.) Mr. K.R. Singh, learned Standing Counsel has raised a preliminary objection that this petition under Article 227 of the Constitution is not maintainable, inasmuch as the impugned order made under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, the Act of 1955) is appealable to this Court under Section 19(1) of the Family Court Act, 1984 (for short, the Act of 1984).
(3.) Mr. Binod Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard at length in opposition to the objection raised by Mr. K.R. Singh about the maintainability of this petition. Mr. Tripathi has placed reliance upon the decision of a Division Bench of this Court in Ravi Saran Prasad alias Kishore vs. Smt. Rashmi Singh AIR 2001 Allahabad 227. In support of his submission that an order, granting maintenance pendente lite under Section 24 of the Act of 1955, is an interlocutory order against which no appeal lies to this Court under Section 19(1) of the Act of 1984, he has drawn the attention of this Court to the holding in Ravi Saran Prasad alias Kishore (supra), where their Lordships of the Division Bench observed: "7....................A conjoint reading of sub-section (1) and sub-section (5) makes us crystal clear that only one appeal lies to the HIgh Court; that no appeal or revison lies except as provided under sub-section 991) from any judgment, order or decree of a Family Court; and further that no appeal lies against such judgment or order which is interlocutory. It cannot be said that the Legislature has created an appellate form in 1984 against the orders passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act nullifying Section 28 of that Act contrary to the object of enactment of the Act as stated in the Bill. 8. Thus, we uphold the objection of the Stamp Reporter that this appeal is not maintainable under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 and dismiss it as not maintainable. 9. It is needless to clarify that it will be opens for a litigant like the appellant to knock the doors of this Court under Article 226 and/or Article 227 of the Constitution of India provided a suitable case for interference is made out against an order passed under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act." ;