IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.511 of 2006 Pradeep Kumar Jha “Deepak‟ S/o Sri Jitendra Narayan Jha, resident of Village + P.O. Dhamaura, P.S.-Babubarhi, Distt. Madhubani, presently posted as Deputy Manager Assets Recovery Branch, State Bank of Patiala, S.C.O. No. 99 to 107, Sector-8-C, Chandigarh --- Petitioner- Appellant. Versus Mrs. Abha Jha, W/O Pradeep Kumar Jha “Deepak” D/O Late Dr. Shyamanand Jha resident of Village- Rahika, P.S. Rahika, Dist. Madhubani presently residing in Ward No.14, Kirtan Bhawan Road, Under Madhubani Munispalty, P.S. + District-Madhubani ----- O.P.—Respondent. ---------- 6. 16.4.2009 Heard Mr. Ram Chandra Lal Das for the petitioner, and Mr. Ajay Kumar Sinha for the respondent. This appeal is directed against the order dated 8.12.2006, passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Madhubani, in Matrimonial Case No. 26 of 2005 (Pradeep Kumar Jha „Deepak‟ Vrs. Abha Jha), whereby he has directed the appellant herein to pay interim maintenance to the respondent. On a full consideration of the matter, we entirely agree with the impugned order and does not call for any interference. Before we part with the records, we would like to express ourselves which calls for immediate attention because it involves the lives of young ones. The appellant herein preferred the aforesaid Matrimonial Case No. 26 of 2005 for restitution of conjugal rights. During pendency of the proceedings, the respondent filed an application under section 23A of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act), praying therein for a decree of divorce, inter alia, on the ground of cruelty. Before the matter could be taken up on merits, Matrimonial Case No. 26 of 2005 was dismissed for non- prosecution along with the said application of the respondent. The 2 restoration application is pending. We had summoned the respondent who had appeared and we had interviewed in-camera in an effort for reconciliation. She informed us in clear and unambiguous terms that it is impossible to live with the appellant who had been pressing her parents for demand of dowry which it is impossible to meet, and had been insulting her by calling names in un-printable language, and also subjected her to cruelty. In that view of the matter, as jointly prayed for by learned counsel for the parties, the order of dismissal for non- prosecution, passed in Matrimonial Case No. 26 of 2005, is hereby set aside, and the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, is hereby directed to dispose of the main matter including respondent‟s application filed under section 23A of the Act, and such other applications filed by the parties, most expeditiously. The appeal is disposed of with the aforesaid observations. The impugned order is hereby up-held. Vinay/ ( S. K. Katriar ,J. ) (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)