IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1480 of 2009 Ashok Prasad, son of Bundi Mahto, resident of village-Mirjapur, P.S.- Rahui, District- Nalanda. ………Petitioner Versus Bimla Devi, wife of Birju Mahto, resident of village-Kekpura, P.S.- Rahui, District- Nalanda. ..Opp.Party ----------- 2. 03.11.2011 The husband petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 17.07.2009 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nalanda at Biharsharif by which he has been directed to pay a sum of Rs.500/-per month to his wife Sangita Devi. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Sangita Devi is not the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and as such, he is not liable to pay the amount of maintenance. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that it has been claimed that Sangita Devi was married to the petitioner in the year 1990 after paying the cash and articles. There has also been litigation under Section 498A of the I.P.C. pending between both the parties. It further appears that inspite of service of notice and summons through Nazarat, registered post and publication of notice 2 in daily newspaper, the petitioner did not appear to contest the case and the case has been heard ex-parte. It further appears that after examination of witnesses on behalf of the victim lady, the impugned order has been passed. I do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order. This petition is dismissed. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)