The main legal point established in the judgment is that the period of limitation for filing revision in terms of Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act is 90 days as prescribed under Article 131 of the Limitation Act, and the provisions of Section 10(2) and Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act are complementary provisions.

NAVANITI PRASAD SINGH, J.

Two questions have been referred to Division Bench by learned Single Judge of this Court.

1) “Whether the limitation of 90 days as prescribed under Section 131 of the Limitation Act, 1963 shall be applicable in cases where the revision application is filed under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act, before the High Court.

2) What would be the effect of Section 10(2) read with Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act as far as the matter of time prescribed for filing a revision application before the High Court is concerned.”

2. The facts leading to the present reference, only in so far as relevant for disposal of the reference, is as under.

3. It appears that due to matrimonial discord the petitioner allegedly has been deserted by her husband. In course of time the petitioner made an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. to the Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnea claiming maintenance. The same was allowed. Thereafter, an application was filed in the said proceeding being Matrimonial 40 of 1999 claiming enhancement because of subsequent events. In terms of Section 127 of Criminal Procedure, by order dated 04.12.2010, the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Purnea enhanced the maintenance from Rs.2,500/- to Rs.4,000/- per month as against Rs.12,000/- per month sought by the petitioner. It is against this order that the present revision application was filed in this Court on or about 24.01.2012 which would be more than a year after the order was passed. Upon this application being filed, the Stamp Reporter raised an objection that this revision was barred by limitation treating the period for filing revision as 90 days, as in the case of applications under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. This has been contested by the petitioner primarily on the ground that this is an application in terms of Section 19(4) of the Family Court Act, 1984 and not an application in terms of Section 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. Accordingly, it is submitted that Article 131 of the Limitation Act which provides for limitation for filing civil revision or criminal revision would not apply and what would apply would be Article 137 of the Limitation Act which prescribes a period of three years where no other period is prescribed. It is under these circumstances when the matter was taken up before the learned Single Judge, the learned Single Judge formulated the questions as noted above and referred to Division Bench for authoritative opinion.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the State at length.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits, apart from what has been noticed above, that Section 19(3) of the Family Court Act provides for a period of limitation of 30 days in respect of filing of appeals but when it comes to filing of criminal revision application u/s 19(4) it does not so provide. The intention of the legislature must have been not to provide for any limitation or at best in such situation it would be article 137 of the Limitation Act that could apply and therefore his application could not be said to be barred by limitation.

6. Having considered the matter, in our view, the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner is not on sound footing and does not appear to be correct. The reasons are noted hereunder. The first thing that we would like to point out that we are dealing with four legislative enactments.

7. The first is the general procedural law in relation to criminal matters, i.e., the Code of Criminal Procedure. The second is the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 which creates right, duties and obligations in respect of Hindus and their marriage. Then we have the Limitation Act. This Limitation Act, we must note at the very outset, applies to this Court and courts below. Then we have the Family Courts Act, 1984.

8. Before Family Court Act, 1984, the aspect of marriage, annulment thereof, dissolution thereof and consequences thereof were e