Hon’ble Umeshwar Pandey, J.—Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.

2. The law point was raised on the last date by the Court if this writ petition is maintainable in the fase of Section 19 of the Family Courts Act and Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which provide for appeal against the judgment, decree and orders passed by the Family Court dealing with the matter for award of interim maintenance under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act.

3. Learned Counsel appearing .for the petitioner has cited a case law of Ravi Saran Prasad alias Klshore v. Smt. Rashml Singh, 2001 (19) LCD 707 and has thus, tried to emphasise that since no appeal would lie against the order passed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act, the only remedy left to the aggrieved party is by way of writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India.

3. Section 19 of Family Courts Act, 1984, provides for appeal from every judgment or order not being interlocutory order of a Family Court to the High Court. Section 19 (1) of Family Courts Act is relevant and is quoted as below :

“19. Appeal.—(1) Save as provided in sub-section (2) and notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908) or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), or in any other law, an appeal shall lie from every judgment or order not being an interlocutory order, of a Family Court to the High Court both on facts and on law.”

5. Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act also provides for appeal against all decrees and orders made by the Court in any proceeding under this Act. Sub-section (1) and (2) of Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act are relevant in this regard and are quoted as below :

“28. Appeals from decrees and orders:—(1) All decrees made by the Court in any proceeding under this Act shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), be appealable as decrees of the Court made in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction, and every such appeal shall lie to the Court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the decisions of the Court given in the exercise of its original civil jurisdiction.

(2) Orders made by the Court in any proceeding under this Act under Section 25 or Section 26 shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), be appealable if they are not interim orders, and every such appeal shall lie to the Court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the decisions of the Court given in exercise of its original civil jurisdiction.”

6. Since Section 19 of Family Courts Act excludes applicability of any other provisions under any law for the time being in force for the purposes of its applicability in regard to filing of appeal, an appeal against the judgment and order of the Family Court Judge shall be maintainable only within the provision of Section 19 aforesaid and therefore the applicability of Section 28 of Hindu Marriage Act for the purpose of filing an appeal again an order under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is apparently ; excluded. In the aforesaid case law, the Division Bench in para-9 of the judgment in these words has held it is more than obvious that remedy of appeal will not be available to the aggrieved party against the order passed by the Family Court Judge under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act. The only remedy, which is available to such aggrieved party would be under Article 226 and 227 of Constitution of India”. Though, the Division Bench has not specifically stated anywhere in the body of its judgment that an order passed under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act is an interlocutory order but it is found by implication that it has actually treated such interim order under Section 24 of Hindu Marriage Act to be an interlocutory order and therefore, has propounded that no appeal against such order would lie and instead a writ petition would be maintainable on behalf of the aggrieved party.

7. In the aforesaid view and the facts and circumstances supported with Division Bench case law of Ravi Saran Pr