IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK RPFAM No.336 of 2023 Harendra Ray …. Petitioner None -versus- Ramani Ray & others …. Opp. Parties CORAM: JUSTICE MRUGANKA SEKHAR SAHOO Order No. ORDER 15.07.2026 (Hybrid Mode) 05. 1. The petitioner-husband in the marriage by filing this application seeks revision of judgment dated 31.10.2022 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court in Cr.P. No.73 of 2014. The said application was filed by the wife in the marriage and two children born from the wedlock of petitioner seeking monthly consolidated maintenance @ Rs.10,000/- from husband-father. 2. The application was favoured. However, directing payment of monthly maintenance for all @ Rs.5,000/- from the date of application i.e. 07.05.2014. 3. None appears for the petitioner though the matter is called twice over, once when it reached and again after resumption of the proceeding post lunch. 4. The matter was presented before this Court on 03.12.2022, being defective was listed before the Deputy Registrar (Judicial), Lawzima on 31.10.2025 for removal of defects. Thereafter, on 16.03.2026, it was listed before this Court and further seven days time was granted taking a liberal view even after four years. On 01.05.2026 further one week time was sought for and granted. The matter was taken up for fresh admission. Learned counsel was heard on 18.05.2026. The facts of the case as well as the propositions of law were noted. At paragraph-5 of the order, the following was directed: “5. Learned counsel for the petitioner upon instructions submits that the Petitioner has not paid any amount towards maintenance as directed. The total accumulated defaulted amount comes to Rs.7,20,000/- from 07.05.2014 to 07.05.2026. The petitioner shall file affidavit indicating whether and how he will secure the amount defaulted till date, for further sustaining the revision application.” At paragraph-6 of the order submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not responding is also noted and is reproduced herein: “6. It is further submitted by the learned counsel for the Petitioner that she has been made effort by sending letter to the Petitioner by Speed Post with registration and proof of delivery, the Petitioner remains incommunicado.” 5. In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not responded to the letters seeking instruction by Speed Post with registration as recorded in Order dated 18.05.2026, it is apparent that the petitioner is not interested in prosecuting the matter. 6. In considered view of this Court, no purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending after more than four years. 7. The petition is accordingly disposed of. Copy of this order shall be forwarded to the learned Judge, Family Court, Balasore to be kept in the records of Cr.P. No.73 of 2014 disposed of by judgment dated 31.10.2022. (Mruganka Sekhar Sahoo) Judge Radha