1. - Heard learned counsels.

2. This revision petition has been filed against the order dated 4.7.2008 passed by the learned trial Court allowing the application for the defendant under Order 9 Rule 13 Civil Procedure Code. by which, the ex-parte decree dated 5.4.2007 passed by the learned trial court was set aside and the suit No.93/2003 was restored by the learned trial court.

3. The plaintiff has approached this Court by way of present revision petition on the limited ground that the learned trial court has erred in restoring the suit merely on the payment of cost of Rs.2,500/- whereas the learned trial court ought to have imposed the condition on defendant company for payment of part of the decreetal sum.

4. Mr. Sajjan Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of V.K. Industries . v. M.P. Electricity Board, Rampur - (2002) 3 SCC 159 , Tea Auction Ltd. v. Grace Hill Tea Industries and another reported in 2006 DNJ (SC)884 and in 2000 (10) Judgment Today 325 - Ramesh v. Ratanakar Bank Ltd. submitted that against the decree of Rs.10,32,799/- at least the defendant company should be required to deposit 25% of th