Sourav Kumar Panda v. Pratikshya Padhi

Orissa HC29 Jan 2026RPFAM/276/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RPFAM No.276 of 2025; Sourav Kumar Panda v. Pratikshya Padhi; High Court of Orissa at Cuttack; Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo; order dated 29.01.2026; challenge to Family Court Bhawanipatna judgment 18.06.2025 in Criminal Proceeding No.31 of 2024 (Section 125 Cr.P.C. maintenance: sought Rs.40,000/- p.m., granted Rs.10,000/- p.m.); withdrawal memo filed; petition disposed of without merits adjudication; copy of order to be tagged to Family Court file.

What did the court decide?

Petition withdrawn at the petitioner's instance; memo taken on record and the petition disposed of, with copy of the order to be tagged to the file of Criminal Proceeding No.31 of 2024 at the Family Court, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi. ¶¶19

Sourav Kumar Panda Vs Pratikshya Padhi — Maintenance and Alimony | Orissa HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶19

Ratio / Principle

Taking the petitioner's memorandum on record, the Court disposed of the petition, in which the petitioner-husband had stated he was not willing to proceed further with his challenge to the Family Court maintenance judgment and sought liberty to file fresh as and when cause of action arises; the Court directed that a copy of the order be forwarded to the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi to be tagged to the file of Criminal Proceeding No.31 of 2024. No adjudication on the merits of the maintenance claim occurred.

¶¶19

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Orissa at Cuttack, RPFAM No.276 of 2025 (order dated 29.01.2026, Hybrid Mode), Coram: Justice Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo. Sourav Kumar Panda (petitioner-husband) had challenged the judgment dated 18.06.2025 of the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi in Criminal Proceeding No.31 of 2024, by which the petition of the opposite party-wife Pratikshya Padhi under Section 125 Cr.P.C. (since repealed), seeking monthly maintenance of Rs.40,000/-, was allowed with monthly maintenance of Rs.10,000/- granted. Before any adjudication, learned counsel for the petitioner (Mr. Abhilash Mishra, Advocate) filed a memo of date stating the petitioner was 'not willing to proceed further with the matter' and seeking permission to withdraw with liberty to file fresh as and when cause of action arises. The Court took the memo on record, ordered the scanned copy updated, and held 'The petitioner stands disposed of', directing that a copy of the order be forwarded to the learned Judge, Family Court, Bhawanipatna, Kalahandi to be tagged to the file of Criminal Proceeding No.31 of 2024. The petition was accordingly disposed of without adjudication on the merits of the maintenance claim.

Sourav Kumar Panda v. Pratikshya Padhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sourav Kumar Panda v. Pratikshya Padhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vivek Garg Vs Neha Garg

Rojalin Behera Vs State of Odisha

Manorama Sahoo Vs Anil Kumar Sahoo

Archana Kumari Sahu Vs Vikash Shyam Padhy

Archana Kumari Sahu Vs Vikash Shyam Padhy

Baruna Pradhan Vs Babita Pradhan