IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C.R. No.1882 of 2008 SHAMBHU SAH Versus MIRA DEVI ----------- 2 2.12.2008 Heard Counsel for the petitioner. For the reasons mentioned in the application (I.A. No. 6609/2008), the delay in filing of the civil revision application is condoned. Coming to the merits of this case, the plea raised by the counsel for the petitioner that the wife, opposite party was living in adultery is to be only noted for its being rejected. There was nothing before the Court below by way of evidence to substantiate such serious allegation against the wife. In this regard the affidavit of the father of the opposite party, the wife heavily relied by the counsel for the petitioner is also of no avail specially when the said father was also not examined as a witness in the court below. If the petitioner was so sanguine about the second marriage of his wife, he had to lead evidence to establish the fact and it was for him to have produced the father of the girl as his witness to substantiate such serious allegation of adultery. That having been not done, this Court would not find any error in the impugned order by which only a sum of Rs. 800/- has been allowed by way of maintenance. Such amount therefore, is neither illegal nor excessive. Accordingly, this application being wholly misconceived is hereby dismissed. Rsh (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.) 2