IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 FAO.No. 60 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 06/11/2007 IN IA.1083/07 & 1084/07 IN OS.170/2005 of II ADDL.SUB COURT,KOZHIKODE APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS 1. M/S. STATUS, SAVITHRI BUILDINGS, WAYANAD ROAD, KOZHIKODE, 2. P.A. PRAMODKUMAR, S/O. BHASKARAN, AGED 45 YEARS, PROPRIETOR, "STATUS", SAVITHRI BUILDINGS, WAYANAD ROAD, KOZHIKODE. 3. MRS. MAHIJA PRAMOD, D/O. BHARATHAN, AGED 40 YEARS, "PLEASANT", AG. ROAD, KOZHIKODE - 32, KACHERI AMSOM, KURUMBRAKKATSSERI DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. (APPELLANTS 1 & 2 REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY P.A. PREMKUMAR, S/O. BHASKARAN, AGED 47 YEARS, 4/343 A, "AUM", GANDHI ROAD, KOZHIKODE.). BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENTS: SREE GANESH CHITS & BANKERS, EDAKKAD, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.V.K.BALACHANDRAN THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & V. K. MOHANAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = F.A.O. NO. 60 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH, 2008. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. This is an appeal arising out of an order passed by the court below allowing an application filed by the appellant to set aside an ex parte decree passed against him, after condoning the delay. However, a condition was imposed to deposit 1/10th of the suit claim for setting aside the ex parte decree. Hence the appellants/defendants have come up in appeal challenging the same. 2. Respondents entered appearance through counsel. We have heard both sides. The appellants were subscribers to a kuri conducted by the plaintiff. They committed default in repayment of the kuri amount and ultimately, the suit was laid for an amount of Rs.7,62,800/- with future interest. It is true that while imposing the condition for setting aside the ex parte order, due regard must be made to the contentions raised by the parties so as to minimize the hardship to be caused in case a larger amount is required to be deposited, because in that event, it will become an onerous condition imposed. But in a case like this, after going into the rival FAO 60/2008 :2: contentions raised by the parties, it cannot be said that 1/10th of the suit claim directed to be paid as per the order of the court below will cause any undue hardship or is onerous in nature calling for any interference by this Court. However, for the purpose of clarification, we direct that the appellant shall deposit an amount of Rs.76,200/- (seventy six thousand and two hundred) within a period of three weeks in which event, as ordered by the court below, the ex parte decree will stand set aside. Subject to the above clarification, the F.A.O. is dismissed. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) V. K. MOHANAN, (JUDGE) knc/-