IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA MA No.642 of 2008 ANISH RANJAN Versus REETA KUMARI ----------- For the Appellant: Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh, Adv. For the Respondent : M/S Sidheshwari Pd. Singh, Sr. Advocate and Krishna Kishore Sinha, Adv. ------- 10/ 09.12.2009 The appeal was disposed of in terms of an agreement between the parties as recorded on 31.07.2009. Only to ensure that the amount of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rs. Ten lakhs) undertaken by the appellant is paid to the respondent within time, we ordered for listing of the case after two months so that we could monitor the compliance of order dated 31.07.2009. On 11.11.2009 the order-sheet mentions that two demand drafts, each of Rs. 5,00,000/- ( Rs. Five lakhs) have been handed over to the learned counsel representing Reeta Kumari, the respondent. The order-sheet further mentions that Reeta Kumari wants to get some apprehension removed from her mind before the matter is finally closed because some cases are pending in Supreme Court and at other places. For that we fixed the matter for today so that the respondent could be present in Court and we may know her apprehension. Today Reeta Kumari has appeared along with her lawyer and has explained her - 2 - difficult situation in life. She has conveyed that in order to meet the litigation expenses as well as expenses in completing her M.B.A. course, she has incurred friendly loan worth Rs. Twenty lakhs and, therefore, the amount of Rs. Ten lakhs is not sufficient to meet her needs. In our view the respondent should find alternative avenues to meet her financial needs and there is no need to reopen the matter which has been concluded by order dated 31.07.2009. Since the appeal has already stood disposed of on 31.07.2009 and we have completed the monitoring and Rs. Ten lakhs have been credited in the account of the respondent, we find no good reason to keep this matter alive. No further order is required. ( Shiva Kirti Singh, ACJ ) ( Anjana Prakash, J ) BTiwary/