Swapan Kr. Sarkar v. Laila Sarkar

19.03.2024 Srimanta Sl. No. 06 Ct. No. 655 IA No.:CAN/1/2016(Old No.:CAN/3720/2016) in CO/2541/2015 Swapan Kumar Sarkar -Vs.- Laila Sarkar Mr. Anindya Chakraborty for the opposite party/wife.

Affidavit-in-opposition filed on behalf of the opposite party be kept with the record.

Petitioner/husband is not represented.

Mr. Anindya Chakraborty, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the opposite party/wife is present.

It appears that the instant application is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the impugned Order No. 24 dated 29th April, 2015 passed by the learned Trial Court in Miscellaneous Case No. 33/2014 filed in connection with Matrimonial Suit No. 77/2013. By passing the impugned order learned Trial Court awarded maintenance to the opposite party/wife and their minor son to the extent of Rs. 7,000/- per month and Rs.5,000/- per month respectively.

Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court, the instant application is preferred at the behest of the petitioner/husband.

It appears that the instant application was dismissed for default by passing an order of this Court

dated 04.12.2015 and against the said order of dismissal an application was taken out at the behest of the petitioner with a prayer for restoration of the same.

It appears that the matter is pending since long and it appears that the petitioner/husband has lost his interest to proceed with the present application and as such there is no justification to keep this revisional application alive in the list and accordingly the instant application being CAN/1/2016 is hereby dismissed. (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)