THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.910 OF 2002 JUDGMENT: The petitioner herein who was unsuccessful in M.C.No.91 of 1996 on the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam, which was filed seeking to grant maintenance from the first respondent herein, who is her husband, approached this Court by filing this Revision Case. As the notice on the second respondent was not served, this Court directed the learned counsel for the petitioner to take out substitute service by publishing the notice in Eenadu Telugu Daily Newspaper of Visakhapatnam Edition. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he does not have any instructions from his client and submitted that the petitioner is not evincing any interest to pursue the case. May be true, the said M.C. filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the Court below by its order, dated15.10.1997, but without any notice to the first respondent herein, no orders can be passed ex parte. Hence, this Court cannot pass any orders in favour of the petitioner and the Revision Case is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision case is dismissed. ___________________________________ JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 28th October 2010 dr