Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Patna High Court - Orders

Anuj Kumar Patel vs Smt.Seema Anuj Kumar Patel @ S on 22 January, 2010

Author: Ravi Ranjan

Bench: Ravi Ranjan

                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

                                 C.R. No.1656 of 2009

                 ANUJ KUMAR PATEL, SON OF AYODHYA PRASAD PATEL
                 RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-USARI, P.S. PAKARIBARAWAN,
                 DISTRICT NAWADAH, AT PRESENT RESIDING OF MOHALLA
                 BELCHHIPARA VERMA SHELL SATIBATI GRAMPANCHAYAT
                 VASAI,TALUKA VASAI, DISTRICT THANE, MUMBAI.
                                          -PETITIONER

                                           Versus

                 1. SMT.SEEMA ANUJ KUMAR PATEL @ SMT. SEEMA SINHA
                    D/O BAIJNATH MAHTO AT PRESENT WIFE OF RABHAKAR
                    KUMAR PATEL, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE THALPOS, P.S.
                    PAKARIBARAWAN, DISTRICT-NAWADAH.
                 2. PRABHAKAR KUMAR PATEL @ PRABHAKAR KUMAR, SON
                    OF LATE YUGAL PRASAD MAHTO, RESIDENT OF
                    VILLAGE THALPOS, P.S. PAKARIBARAWAN, DISTRICT
                    NAWADA.
                                           -OPPOSITE PARTIES.

                                        -------

                    For the Petitioner : Mr. Durgesh Nandan

                    For Opp. Parties         : Mr. Niraj Kumar-I


2   22.01.2010

After some argument Mr. Durgesh Nandan, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks permission to withdraw this Civil Revision in view of the provision as contained in Section 19(5) of the Family Court Act, 1984 and its interpretation by a Division Bench of this Court in Jagdish Prasad Chouhan V. Bhuneshwar Chouhan & Anr., 2009 (3) PLJR 931, holding that forum of Civil Revision would not be available against any interim / interlocutory orders passed by Family Court.

2

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he wants to withdraw this Civil Revision to avail any other remedy if available under law. Learned counsel for the opposite parties raises no objection.

In above view of the matter, this Civil Revision is dismissed as withdrawn.

(Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.) AAhmad