(1) 946 CA 10110-2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10110 OF 2026 IN FAMILY COURT APPEAL NO. 72 OF 2024 DR. PRAJWALIT SUNDARRAO RAUT VERSUS SAU. PRYANKA PARJWALIT RAUT ... Advocate for the Applicant : Mr. Kishor J. Ghute Patil ... CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, & VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, J.J. DATED : SEPTEMBER 03, 2026 ORDER:- 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2. The application is filed for restoration of Family Court Appeal No. 72 of 2024, which was dismissed for non prosecution vide order dated 31.07.2026 on the ground that appellant did not take steps against the respondent/wife. 3. On perusal of the said order, it further appears that the bailiff report in respect of service upon the respondent/wife indicated that, she had already started cohabiting with the appellant/husband. However, today the learned counsel for the applicant submits that it was wrongly stated by the father of the respondent/wife that she was cohabiting with the appellant/husband. He further placed on record (2) 946 CA 10110-2026.odt fresh address of respondent/wife, as she could not be found on her earlier address. 4. Thus, it appears that the matter was dismissed only for want of detail address of the wife, and therefore, we do not find any reason to issue notice to the respondent/wife for restoring this appeal. Accordingly, the application stands allowed and order dated 31.07.2026 stands recalled. Family Court Appeal No. 74 of 2024 is restored to its original stage. 5. The application stands disposed of. (VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV) (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE) JUDGE JUDGE YSK/