IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1883 of 2008 PRATIBHA VERMA Versus SANTOSH KUMAR VERMA ----------- 2 1.12.2008 For the reasons mentioned in this application (I.A. No. 6607/2008), the delay in filing the civil revision application (C.R. No. 1883/2008) is hereby condoned. On merits, in the opinion of this Court, the impugned order cannot be sustained for a simple proposition that when the wife, petitioner had led evidence both on the question of negligence as also the income of her husband, the opposite party, the same had not been controverted in any manner by producing any evidence by the husband. In such a situation, the findings of the Court below that a married lady with two children from the marriage can sustain herself from an income of Rs. 1,000/- as Angan Bari Sevika or Rs. 1100/- from the rent of the house seems to be illogical if not absurd. That apart, the findings recorded by the Court below that the husband was a Feriwala and as such was not capable of having any income again seems to be an innovation based on speculation especially when the husband did not lead any evidence. That being so, this Court cannot sustain the impugned order and accordingly, the same is set aside 2 with a direction to the Court below to re-consider the whole issue and pass a fresh order within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)