25.8.2026 Ct. No. 21 Sl No. 4. ASR CO/3637/2018 RATNA CHATTERJEE VS SOVAN CHATTERJEE Mr. Joydeep Kar, Sr. Adv. Mr. Suvasish Sengupta Mr. Avijit Dey Mr. Ajeyeea Dey ………For the Opposite party. In spite of notice being served upon the learned counsel representing the petitioner/wife none is representing the petitioner/wife today. In support of the notice been served both physically and through email copy of an Advocate’s letter has been filed and copy of the e-mail has also been filed. Let it be kept with the record. The learned Senior counsel has submitted that as both the divorce petition and the counter claim for restitution of conjugal rights been dismissed so the revisional application has become infructuous, as such let this revisional application be dismissed. From the record it transpires that challenging an order directing the husband/opposite party to pay Rs. 70,000/- (Rupees seventy thousand) as litigation cost, which according to the petitioner/wife is paltry, the petitioner has preferred this present civil revision. 2 The learned Senior counsel representing the petitioner/husband on earlier occasion has provided a copy of the judgment delivered by the learned trial court in Matrimonial Suit no. 103 of 2017. From the copy of the said judgment it transpires that the learned trial judge has been pleased to dismiss the divorce suit filed by the petitioner/husband and has also been pleased to dismiss the counter claim seeking restitution of conjugal rights filed by the opposite party/wife. As the said matrimonial suit has been dismissed and the counter claim been also dismissed the present revisional application has become infructuous. In such circumstance, the civil revisional application is dismissed. (Supratim Bhattacharya, J)