IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.366 of 2011 MADAN MOHAN SINGH S/O- SRI DEO BACHAN SINGH, R/O- VILLAGE AJAGARA, P.S.- KUDARA, DISTRICT- KAIMUR (BHABUA). Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. ANITA DEVI, D/O- SRI RAM SURESH SINGH, R/O- VILLAGE SONBARSA, P.S.- CHAINPUR, DISTRICT- KAIMUR (BHABUA). ----------- 2 23.03.2011 I.A. NO. 686 of 2011 Although the present application was listed under the heading “Orders on Petitions” for consideration of application seeking condonation of delay, I permitted the petitioner to make submissions on merit. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. It is submitted that the order dated 18.1.2010 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Kaimur (Bhabua) in Maintenance Case No. 25 of 2009 was passed ex-parte. Learned Principal Judge has observed as under in the impugned order: “After service of notice, the O.P. Madan Mohan Singh who happens to be the husband of the petitioner did not appear in this case and then the case was fixed for exparte hearing vide order dt. 7.10.09” If the stand of the petitioner is that notice was not validly served on him then the course open to him would be to approach the said Court for setting aside the order on the said grounds in terms of provisions contained under Section 126 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2 This Court, in view of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, observes that the petitioner should approach the said Court in terms of the aforesaid provision within four weeks from today along with a copy of the present order. If such an application is filed in the manner stated above, learned Principal Judge, Kaimur (Bhabhua) shall consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law. With this observation, the application stands disposed of. Since I have considered the application on merit, the question of limitation pales into insignificance. pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J)