IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.972 of 2009 RAKESH SAH @ RAKESH KUMAR SAH Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Smt. Anuradha Devi For the Petitioner :Mr.Vishal Sourabh, Advocate For the State :Mrs. Indu Bala Pandey, APP. ----- 2. 06.07.2009 Heard. With the consent of the parties, the case is disposed of at this stage itself. The petitioner who is husband, has called in question the order dated 10.8.2007, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bettiah in Maintenance Case No.353/05. From perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the said order was passed on appreciation of evidence led by the wife (petitioner of maintenance case). The learned Principal Judge, Family Court by the impugned order has directed payment of Rs.1000/- monthly maintenance allowance to the wife (o.p.no.2 herein). Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order was passed ex-parte. From his own showing it appears that he had earlier moved an application for recall on 01.06.2007 which was not pressed and ultimately rejected. This Court finds that the petitioner had knowledge about the pendency of the case and yet he did not appear and contest the same and thereafter filed the present application. - 2 - There is no merit in this application which is accordingly dismissed. However, it is always open to the petitioner to approach the court below for seeking variation in amount of maintenance . If an application is moved, the same shall be considered on its own merit uninfluenced by the present order. Since the matter has been considered on merit, the application seeking condonation pales into insignificance. I.A. No.1236 of 2009 stands disposed of. hr ( Kishore K. Mandal )