IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1138 of 2009 PRAMOD KUMAR Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR &ANR ----------- 2 21.07.2009 Ref. I.A.No. 1468 of 2009: The present interlocutory application has been filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the revision application. There appears to be 242 days delay in approaching this court. Petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Motihari, Dist. East Champaran, whereby, on consideration of the evidence both oral and documentary brought on record by both the parties, directed the petitioner (husband) to pay a sum of Rs. 2,000/- (two thousand) per month to the opposite party no.2 (wife) and her daughter as maintenance. In the limitation application, the following facts have been stated in paragraph nos. 2 and 3 “2. That it is humbly pointed out here that the petitioner abovenamed had handed over his file and fees to an advocate practicing in the Motihari Civil Court and he had been asked by the client to make him aware about any stage of the case since he was working outside of Bihar, but the conducting lawyer could not give proper legal advice to the petitioner in time and, therefore, delay happened in filing the instant petition within the prescribed time. 3. That it is further humbly stated and submitted that if the delay as aforesaid is not condoned, then it would cause irreparable loss and injury to the petitioner.” This court on perusal of the statements and the 2 submissions advanced in support thereof finds that the explanations are grossly vague. He has not even disclosed the name of the advocate and on what date he was entrusted with the files. When did he come to know about the non-filing of the revision application in this court. Even if a lenient view is taken in the matter, this court finds its inability in allowing this application on the grounds set out above. The application is, therefore, not fit to be allowed. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Since the application seeking condonation of delay is rejected and the revision application is barred by limitation the same, is, therefore, incompetent in law. Criminal Revision application is also dismissed. Sym/ (Kishore K. Mandal, J.)