IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.483 of 2009 SHEO PRAVESH SINGH son of Gobind Singh, workin in UCO Bank canteen, Ground Floor, Head Office, 10,No.G.T.M.S.G.Kolkata.- Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. Paadmini devi wife of sshiv Pravesh Singh, 3. R/O Village Derka, P.s.Derma, Ambarpur, Distt- Nawada. Opp.Party. ----------- 4. 18.5.2009. Heard. The petition at flag “A” has been filed for condoning the delay of about 11 months in filing the revision application. It appears that by the impugned order dated 14.2.2008 passed in Misc.Case No.33 of 1996, maintenance allowed to the opposite party was enhanced from Rs.500/ to Rs.1500/. It further appears that a sum of Rs.500/ was directed to be paid to opposite party no.2 by order passed on 30.6.1999. It is the case of the opposite party that the petitioner is working as clerk in UCO Bank at Kolkata and as such prayed for enhancing the maintenance to the tune of Rs.5000/. It is admitted by the petitioner that he is working in UCO Bank at Kolkata since long. It appears that he did not appear in the court below 2 in spite of notices issued against him. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order enhancing the maintenance has been passed ex parte and as such, he did not have knowledge of the order. He states that he came to know about the aforesaid on 20.9.2008. It appears that the petitioner even thereafter did not file this application immediately. I do not find that the petitioner has made any valid ground for condoning the delay of eleven months in filing the revision application. Thus, limitation petition at flag „A‟ as also the revision application are dismissed. ahk (Samrendra Pratap Singh,J.)