IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No 3991 of 2010 1. MRS. JYOTSANA MRIDUBHASINI W/O NITENDRA NATH SINHA @ PUNIT AT PRESENT RESIDENT AT B1/C 501, VALENTINE APARTMENT OPP. TO J.C.BERGIS COMPOUND FILM CITY ROAD, P.S.- DINDOSI, DISTT.- GREATER MUMBAI, MALAD EAST, MUMBAI-97 Versus 1. STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH ADVOCATE GENERAL, BIHAR, PATNA 2. NITENDRA NATH SINHA @ PUNIT S/O SHRI J.N.SINHA R/O A-60, HOUSING COLONY, KANKARBAGH, P.S.- KANKARBAGH, DISTT.- PATNA AT PRESENT 201 HOPE RESIDENCY, KANKARBAGH, P.S.- KANKARBAGH, DISTT.- PATNA *** For the petitioner : Mr Anil Kr Singh, Advocate For the respondents : M/s Dr Anil Kr Lal & Mukesh Kr, Advocates *** 2 23.03.2010 Petitioner is the defendant in a Matrimonial Case filed by her husband for divorce. The case was filed in 2001. We are in 2010. In 2007, evidence on behalf of the application-husband closed. The applicant had examined three witnesses that is himself, his mother and his father. After more than 13 months of his evidence being closed, the petitioner-wife filed an application for recall of the two witnesses for cross-examination which was not done by her on earlier occasion because she was consistently absent. While that application was pending, she examined herself. She was cross-examined. Now, she again pressed her application for recall of applicant’s witnesses for cross-examination. Learned Family Judge has rejected the application holding that she is only interested in prolonging the proceeding because she is getting ad interim maintenance. 2 Learned counsel for the applicant has appeared and opposes the prayer of the petitioner. He states that even though there were efforts to reconcile the matter, it could not fructify and it is not possible for the two to live together having lived separately for almost ten years now. Be that as it may, as a matter of last indulgence, the learned Family Judge is directed to fix a date within 15 days from today on which day both the applicant’s witnesses would be present. Both of them would be cross-examined on the same day by the petitioner. No further adjournment would be granted to the petitioner on this count. Thereafter, the matter would be finally heard and decision rendered. With this observation, the writ petition, modifying the impugned order, is disposed of. M.E.H./ (Navaniti Prasad Singh)