JUDGEMENT 1. Heard learned counsel for the appellant under Order 41 Rule 11 CPC and also in respect of I.A. No. 8388 of 2010 wherein a prayer has been made for staying the operation of the impugned order and judgment dated 5.6.2010 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kaimur at Bhabua in Maintenance Case No. 18 of 2009. 2. Notice was issued upon the respondents and although Mr. Sunil Kumar Tiwary, Advocate has entered appearance, he is not present in court. 3. This appeal is admitted for hearing. Call for the lower court records. 4. Let fresh notices be issued to the respondents in hearing matter for which requisites by ordinary process must be filed within one week, failing which the appeal shall stand dismissed without further reference to a Bench. 5. Rule is made returnable within six months. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that learned Family Court has not correctly appreciated the provision of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 and the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Danial Latifi & Another vs. Union of India, (2001)7 SCC 740 . According to learned counsel for the appellant the Family Court should not have allowed maintenance to respondent no. 1 when a Talaknama was produced. Specific defence has been taken that the appellant had divorced respondent no. 1 and admittedly they are living separately since last six years. So far as grant of maintenance at the rate of 1,500/- per month to respondent no. 2, a minor daughter, is concerned, only submission is that amount is excessive. 7. In the facts of this case, the direction in the judgment and order under appeal for paying maintenance at the rate of 1,500/- per month to respondent no. 1 is stayed. However, maintenance at the rate of 1,000/- shall continue to be paid regularly every month to respondent no. 2. 8. I.A. No. 8388 of 2010 stands disposed of.