The imposition of conditions for setting aside an ex parte decree depends on the facts and circumstances of the case, including the disputed amount owed by the defendant.

A. VENKATARAMI REDDY, J.

( 1 ) THE defendant in the suit O. S. No. 123 of 1987 on the file of the II Additional subordinate Judge, Warangal is the petitioner in this C. R. P.

( 2 ) AN ex parte decree was passed on 24-7-89. On coming to know of theex parte decree the petitioner herein filed I. A. No. 618/89 under Or. 9, Rule 13 CPC for setting aside the ex parte decree. The said application was dismissed by the learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Warangal. Aggrieved by the same the defendant-petitioner herein preferred an appeal C. M. A. No. 22/90 to the additional District Judge, Warangal. The lower appellate court found that the suit summons were not served on the defendant. It therefore set aside the ex parte decree passed against the defendant, but imposed a condition mat the defendant shall deposit the costs of Rs. 2,705/- and also a sum of Rs. 15,000/- towards suit amount on or before 3-12-90. Aggrieved by the imposition of the condition of depositing Rs. 15,000/- only, the above C. R. P. is filed.

( 3 ) IT is submitted by Mr. V. S. R. Anjaneyulu, learned counsel for the petitioner that as the lower appellate court was satisfied mat the suit summons were not served, it is a case for setting aside the ex parte decree; he should not have imposed the condition of depositing Rs. 15,000/- although the lower appellate court is justified in directing dposit of Rs. 2,705/- towards costs. He relied upon a decision reported in Raj Kumar vs. Mohan Meakin Breweries wherein the allahabad High Court held that while setting aside the ex parte decree, the court can always award costs to compensate the otherside for inconvenience and loss caused to the said party. "it is also clear where the court finds that the defendant is at fault or there was omission on his part or it was because of his act that there had been delay in the disposal of the case, the court may impose reasonable terms. It is not open to the court at any time to impose onerous terms. An order directing the party to deposit 1/5th of the decretal amount is not justified when the amount claimed in the suit is large one. "

( 4 ) HE also invited my attention to the decision of this court reported in V. Kasturi Bai vs. P. Varalakshmi wherein K. Ramaswamy, J. (as he then was) observed:"in view of the finding of the lower court that the first appellant is a widow arid the second appellant went on pilgrimage and they were therefore prevented from appearing in the Court and when it is satisfied that there was sufficient cause for not appearing in the court, the lower court should have exercised its discretion in awarding costs incurred on the day when the suit was called for hearing and should not have imoosed the onerous conditions of depositing half the decretal amount and suit costs.

( 5 ) THUS it is evident that the imposition of the terms depends upon various facts and circumstances of the case. In the instant case in the petition filed for setting aside the ex parte decree he has clearly stated that some amount is due from him to the plaintiff but according to him the said amount has to be quantified only after looking into accounts. He stated that even according to the plaintiff the last transaction was of Rs. 2,60,148-89 ps. and that he paid only rs. 2,41,200/-". Thus it is clear that the case of the defendant also is that he owes some amount, though the quantum is disputed. In the circumstances of the case, since the principal is nearly Rs. 20,000/- and in view of the averment made in the petition filed by the petitioner in the lower court, I consider it appropriate, reasonable and just to direct the petitioner to deposit Rs. 10,000/- and costs of rs. 2,705/- in the lower court within a period of five weeks from today. In default this CRP stands dismissed.

( 6 ) THE C. R. P. is allowed to the extent indicated above, modifying the order under revision. No costs.

( 7 ) THE learned II Additional Subordinate Judge, Warangal is directed to dispose of the suit expeditiously

Click Here to Read the rest of this document