JUDGMENT AND ORDER : Heard learned counsel, Mr. B. Deb for the petitioners and learned counsel, Mr. R.G. Chakraborty for the respondent. 2. This is a petition under Section 19(4) of the Family Courts Act challenging judgment dated 21.03.2013 passed by learned Judge, Family Court, Agartala in Misc. Case No.328 of 2012. 3. The petitioner made an application under Section 125 of CrPC before the learned Judge, Family Court, Agartala seeking maintenance for herself and her minor daughter, Miss Jyotika Das, and that was registered as case No. Misc.(Maintenance) 328 of 2012. After hearing both side, by judgment dated 21.03.2013, learned Judge, Family Court directed the respondent husband to pay maintenance to the minor daughter at the rate of Rs. 1,500/- per month and refused to grant any maintenance to the petitioner wife. Aggrieved, the present revisional application is filed. 4. The reason assigned in the judgment for not allowing the maintenance to the petitioner wife is that the petitioner wife deserted the husband and that a decree for restitution of conjugal right was passed by the Civil Court in TS(RCR) No.328 of 2011 and the petitioner wife did not comply the order. Be that as it may, there is further development as of now. It is submitted by learned counsel of both side that the respondent husband has now filed a petition against the petitioner wife seeking divorce in the Family Court, Agartala and that has been registered as TS(Divorce) 346 of 2014. The petitioner wife has approached the Family Court for granting her maintenance pendente lite and the order has been passed by the Family Court granting maintenance pendente lite. While the Family Court has already passed an order under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act, the simultaneous application under Section 125 cannot be insisted. 5. Learned counsel, Mr. Deb has submitted that the respondent husband is irregular in making payment and that payment has not been made to the petitioner wife as per the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court. Since the matter of granting maintenance has already been taken up in a divorce proceeding by the learned Judge, Family Court, I think the present revisional application for granting maintenance to the petitioner wife has become infructuous. Since the matter of granting maintenance has already been taken up in a divorce proceeding by the learned Judge, Family Court, I think the present revisional application for granting maintenance to the petitioner wife has become infructuous. If payment of the maintenance allowance as directed by the learned Judge, Family Court under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage Act is violated, the petitioner wife will be at liberty to approach the learned Judge, Family Court to realize the maintenance in due process. 6. The revisional application accordingly stands disposed of. 7. Send back the L.C. records along with a copy of this judgment.