Vivek KumarversusPriti Kumari

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                  CRIMINAL REVISION No.772 of 2024
======================================================
Vivek Kumar S/O Gaurishankar Prasad Tanti, R/o - Champa Nagar Tanti
Bazar, Near Jain Temple, T.B.Road, P.S.- Nathnagar, District- Bhagalpur.

                                                           ... ... Petitioner
                                 Versus

Priti Kumari W/o Vivek Tanti, D/o Dinesh Tanti, R/o Village- Kalyanpur,
P.S.- Bariyarpur, District- Munger.
                                                      ... ... Respondent
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner    :      Mr. Arvind Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the O.P. No. 2    :      Mr. Shivendra Kumar Sinha, Advocate
                             Mr. Ranjeet Patel, Advocate
                             Mr. Avnish Kumar Singh, Advocate
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
                      ORAL JUDGMENT
 Date : 16-02-2026

                 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

                 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset

 submits that the petitioner is not in a position to make payment

 of any maintenance amount and for this reason the order dated

 09.09.2025 could not be complied with, by which a conditional

 stay was granted to the petitioner against any coercive steps.

                 3. Since the petitioner has failed to comply with the

 conditions of the order dated 09.09.2025 for making payment of

 Rs. 9,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2 starting from

 the month of September, stay on no coercive steps is vacated.

                 4. The instant revision petition has been filed

 against the judgment and order dated 20.04.2022 passed by the

 Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger passed in Maintenance
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.772 of 2024 dt.16-02-2026
                                            2/4




         Case No. 22 of 2017, whereby and whereunder the learned

         Family Court ordered the petitioner to pay a maintenance

         amount of Rs. 9,000/- per month to the opposite party no. 2.

                         5. In this case, an interlocutory application has

         been filed for condonation of delay of 778 days which was

         allowed vide order dated 09.09.2025 and the delay in filing of

         revision petition was condoned.

                         6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits

         that the petitioner did not get any opportunity to contest the

         claim of the opposite party no. 2. No notice was served upon the

         petitioner and the learned Family Court without appreciating

         this fact that the registered notice as well as notice sent through

         speed post returned undelivered with an endorsement that the

         petitioner did not stay at the address. Similarly, the notice sent

         through ordinary process was also returned as it reached the

         process server after the date fixed and it also appears that no

         new date was fixed for fresh service of notice. However, the

         learned Family Court has not considered all these facts. The

         order of the learned Family Court is against the principles of

         natural justice and an opportunity of hearing was not given to

         the petitioner.

                         7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2

         vehemently contends that the petitioner avoided receiving the
Patna High Court CR. REV. No.772 of 2024 dt.16-02-2026
                                            3/4




         notices and got the notices returned with false endorsement.

         Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner did not take

         any steps for setting aside the ex parte order before the learned

         trial Court. The petitioner has got every knowledge about the

         proceeding before the learned Family Court and when the

         matter reached the stage of execution, he has now approached

         this Court. Therefore, there is no merit in the present revision

         petition and the same be dismissed.

                         8. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the

         rival submissions made on behalf of the parties and perused the

         record. From perusal of the record of the learned trial Court, I

         find that the notice sent through ordinary process was returned

         by the process server with noting that it was received after the

         due date and was being returned without service. Similarly, the

         undelivered registered cover and speed post also returned with

         endorsement that the addressee did not reside at the address

         anymore. Therefore, it appears that there is non-compliance of

         Order V Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Further, no

         steps were taken for substituted service under Order V Rule 20

         of Code of Civil Procedure. One of the basic principles of the

         common law system is that the other party should be heard

         before passing any order against him and it appears that orders

         of the learned trial Court is passed in violation of the rule of
             Patna High Court CR. REV. No.772 of 2024 dt.16-02-2026
                                                         4/4




                      audi alteram partem.

                                      9. Therefore, I am of the opinion that the impugned

                      order could not be sustained and hence, the said order is set

                      aside. The parties are directed to appear before the learned

                      Principal Judge, Family Court, Munger / Successor Court on

                      25.02.2026 at 11:00 AM, and the Court concerned would give

                      an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and thereafter, take

                      expeditious steps for disposal of the case before it.

                                      10. Accordingly, the present revision petition is

                      allowed.

                                      11. Office is directed to return the LCR forthwith,

                      if any.

                                      12. If the petitioner fails to appear before the

                      learned trial Court on the aforementioned date, then the order of

                      this Court will lose its effect.



                                                                      (Arun Kumar Jha, J)

Shahnawaz/-
AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                N/A
Uploading Date          17.02.2026
Transmission Date       17.02.2026