Vivekananda Roy v. Lipika Barman

14.

04.01.

Ct. 655 s.g.

C.O. 133 of 2014 Sri Vivekananda Roy Vs.

Smt. Lipika Barman Mr. Tapash K. Bhattacharya Mr. Aviroop bhattacharya .... for the Opposite Party.

Petitioner is not represented.

Opposite party/wife is represented.

The instant application is preferred challenging the impugned order dated 20th September, 2013 passed by the learned Trial Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. By passing the impugned order learned Trial Court rejected the application filed under Order 6 Rule 17 of Civil Procedure Code by the petitioner/husband.

Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court instant application is preferred on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the impugned order was passed on 20th September, 2013 and this instant application challenging the said order is pending since the year 2014. So I find there is no justification to keep this revisional application alive in the list.

There is reasonable ground to believe the petitioner

has lost interest to proceed with the present application. So there is no option left to dismiss the present case. Accordingly, the revisional application being C.O. No. 133 of 2014 is hereby dismissed for default. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.

There will be no order as to costs.

(Prasenjit Biswas, J.)