Patna High CourtCR. REV./1298/2012withdrawn

Nisha Kumari And ANR. v. Sri Vikash Mishra

2019-01-07Mr. Justice Dinesh Kumar Singh2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Revision No.1298 of 2012 Arising Out of PS. Case No.- Year- Thana- District- Madhubani ======================================================

1. Nisha Kumari, Wife of Sri Vikash Mishra.

2. Ruchi Kumari, daughter of Sri Vikash Mishra through the guardianship of the petitioner no. 1 both resident of village - Kerwar, P.O. - Bisfi, P.S. - Bisfi, District - Madhubani, at present residing at Village - East of Primay School, Aadarsh Nagar, P.S. - Madhubani, District - Madhubani. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

Sri Vikash Mishra, Son of Late Deo Narain Mishra, Resident of Village - Kerwar, P.O.- Bisfi, P.S.- Bisfi, District- Madhubani at present residing at Aditya Birla Money Ltd., Vishwakarma Arcade, Majura Gate, Surat. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Vinay Mistry For the Respondent/s :

Mr.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 07-01-2019 The present criminal revision application was filed by the petitioner, Nisha Kumari, being the wife of opposite party, Vikash Mishra, against the order dated 23.07.2012 passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Madhubani in M.R. Case No. 192 of 2011, whereby the opposite party, being the husband of petitioner no. 1 was directed to make payment of maintenance amount of Rs.1200/- per month to petitioner no. 1 and Rs.300/- per month to the minor daughter of petitioner no. 1, being petitioner no.2 by 15th day of each succeeding month from the date of passing of the order, i.e., 23.07.2012. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the present revision application has been filed for

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.1298 of 2012(8) dt.07-01-2019 2/2 enhancement of the maintenance granted to the petitioners by the learned Court below. However, it is submitted that the issue has been resolved between the parties in terms of payment of one time settlement amount and hence, the petitioner no. 1-wife does not want to prosecute the present application. In the circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw this revision application.

Accordingly, this application is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Dinesh Kumar Singh, J) DKS/- U T