RAJNISH KUMAR Vs. PARVEEN KUMARI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite making all efforts, petitioner is not responding to him and, therefore, he is not in a position to plead the case on behalf of the petitioner.

(2.) Present petition has been filed by the petitioner assailing impugned order dtd. 29/9/2020, passed by learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Una, District Una, H.P., in CIS Regd. No.89/2019, titled as Parveen Kumari vs. Rajnish Kumar, whereby respondents have been awarded maintenance to be paid by the petitioner. Therefore, it is duty of the petitioner to make arrangement for his representation and to impart instructions to his learned counsel, enabling him to plead case of the petitioner.

(3.) On the first day vide order dtd. 24/2/2021, interim order was passed in favour of the petitioner subject to deposit of 50% of the maintenance amount in the Registry of this Court, but for failure in compliance of the said order, stay stands vacated automatically as clarified vide order dtd. 19/4/2021. Thereafter also, petitioner has not come forward to pursue the present case.