IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1923 of 2007 DR.SUBHASH CHANDAR THAKUR Versus SANJU DEVI ----------- 03. 12.05.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. This petition is being finally heard at this stage at the instance of the petitioner. This civil revision has been filed by the petitioner, who was opposite party in the court below challenging order dated 01.07.2007(02.07.2007) by which the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger, directed the petitioner to pay ad interim amount of Rs. 1,200.00 per month to the opposite party, who was applicant in the court below, as maintenance in Maintenance Case No. 66 M of 2006. The aforesaid maintenance case was filed by applicant-opposite party for ad interim maintenance. It transpires that admittedly the marriage had taken place on 27.02.2004 and thereafter the opposite party could not or did not live with the petitioner and went to her parental house. As per the claim of the opposite party she was tortured and forcibly ousted from the house of the petitioner due to which a criminal case for offences punishable under section 498A and other provision of penal code has been filed by her and is pending. On the other hand, the petitioner has filed a case for dissolution of marriage with opposite party claiming desertion by the opposite party herself and not for any reason alleged by the - 2 - opposite party. However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the continuation of the marriage between the parties is admitted. However, the question of desertion has been raised by the petitioner in case of dissolution of marriage which has to be considered there. In the instant case the learned court has very carefully considered the matter and has found that the petitioner, who was opposite party in the court below, did not file any reply to the said petition and on 06.02.2007 he filed a petition that he was ready to pay Rs. 1,25,000/- in lump sum for her maintenance. In the said circumstances, the learned court below was quite justified in passing the said order. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court does not find any illegality or jurisdiction error in the impugned order of the learned court below and accordingly, this civil revision is dismissed. harish (S.N. Hussain, J.)