The High Court dismissed a revisional application as infructuous because approximately 12 years had passed since the impugned maintenance order, rendering the subject matter dead.
The revisional application was dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
AD. 1. April 13, 2022. MNS.
C.R.R. No. 387 of 2011
In Re: Ganesh Das …petitioner. Mr. Amal Krishna Samanta …for the petitioner. Mr. Binoy Panda, Ms. Puspita Saha …for the State.
Petitioner is represented. No affidavit-of-service is filed today.
However, it has been contended by the petitioner that vide impugned order dated 13.05.2010, the petitioner was ordered to pay an amount of Rs.700/- per mensum for the wife and Rs.400/- per mensum for her minor daughter towards interim maintenance allowance.
It appears that since then about 12 years passed and the subject matter for the revision might have become infructuous. There is also nothing in the record that the interim order of stay granted earlier still continuing or not.
Learned counsel for the petitioner could not say whether said maintenance amount was paid in terms of the impugned order or not.
In view of above, I find that the revisional application has become infructuous due to long lapse of time and as such, it is dismissed.
(Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
whether a revisional application regarding interim maintenance becomes infructuous due to long lapse of time.
Ganesh Das
State
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
