D. K. SETH, J.

( 1 ) MR. Sharad Malviya, learned counsel for the applicant has assailed the impugned order dated 22nd May, 1999 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Moradabad in Misc. Case No. 25 of 1998 arising out of M. A. C. Case No. 9 of 1995 which was decreed ex parte on 13th november. 1998. The petitioner having filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree, the same was registered as Case No. 25 of 1998 which had since been allowed by the impugned order dated 25th May, 1999 directing the petitioner to deposit half of the decretal amount in the court within 30th May, 1999. In the said order, date 3rd July. 1999 was fixed for proceeding with the case. The restoration was subject to deposit of half of the decretal amount. Mr. Malviya has challenged that part of the order by which the order dated 25th May, 1999 was made conditional to the deposit of half of the decretal amount. He contends that the expression used in order ix, Rule 13 does not contemplate deposit of the decretal amount. On the other hand, it contemplates payment of cost to the Court or otherwise. The expression upon such terms as to costs is confined to the cost of the suit only. The phr