S.P. Sinha, J

1. The defendants are the petitioners in both these applications. This order will govern both of them. Civil Revision No. 67 of 1973 is directed against an order dated the 7th of June, 1972 by which the plaintiff has been granted maintenance. Civil Revision No. 974 of 1972 is directed against an order dated the 11th of August, 1972 by which the quantum of maintenance has been determined. According to the learned counsel for the defendants the order granting maintenance was without jurisdiction and the order determining the quantum thereof was much more so.

2. The relevant facts leading to the filing of these petitions are as follows:–

The plaintiff opposite party claiming to be the widow of one of the coparceners had filed a suit for partition of the family estate which suit pas been registered as Title Suit No. 35 of 1967 of the court of the Subordinate Judge II, Patna and is pending disposal. On the 7th of June, 1968 the plaintiff filed an application for appointment of a receiver and another application for grant of ad-interim maintenance. Both these petitions were disposed of by an order dated the 28th of January, 1970 with regard to the petition for mainten