CRP 244/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B.P. KATAKEY The petitioner, who was the appellant in Money Appeal No .6/2007 filed in the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, FTC, Dibrug arh, is aggrieved by the order dated 30th March, 2010 passed by the learned Cour t below, whereby and whereunder the order dated 15th March, 2010 passed in Misc. Case No.6/2010 arising out of the said Money Appeal readmitting the appeal afte r recalling the order dated 27th November, 2009, has been vacated due to non dep osit of the cost of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) awarded vide order dated 15 th March, 2010. Mr. BK Bhattacharjee, the learned counsel for the petiti oner has submitted that the awarding cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees Two Thousand) was not within the knowledge of the petitioner, as he was not informed by the learn ed counsel about the requirement of deposit of such cost for the purpose of read mission of the appeal. The learned counsel, therefore, submits that the petitio ner may even now be allowed to deposit the cost and the order dated 30th March, 2010 may be set aside by directing the learned Additional District Judge, FTC, D ibrugarh to hear and dispose of the appeal on merit. Mr. Bhatra, the learned counsel for the respondent has s ubmitted that since the order dated 15th March, 2010 was a conditional order, th e learned Court below had no alternative but to recall the said order when the p etitioner failed to deposit the cost, i.e. failed to comply with the condition. Mr. Bhatra, however, has submitted that the respondent has no objection if the petitioner is allowed to deposit the cost. However, the further cost may be imp osed for compelling the respondent to contest the present proceeding before this Court. It appears from the materials made available that the Mo ney Appeal No.6/2007 filed by the present petitioner was dismissed for non prose cution on 27th November, 2009. An application was thereafter, filed by the prese nt petitioner for readmission of the appeal by recalling the said order dated 27 th November, 2009 together with an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 seeking condonation of delay in filing the application. The said app lication was allowed vide order dated 15th March, 2010 passed in Misc. Case No.6 /2010 condoning the delay and readmitting the appeal by recalling the order date d 27th November, 2009, however, on condition of payment of cost of Rs.2000/- (Ru pees Two Thousand) by the petitioner. The said cost having not been deposited on the date fixe d, i.e. on 30th March, 2010, the order dated 15th March, 2010 readmitting the ap peal has been recalled, as the said order was a conditional. The petitioner, however, in the present petition has sta ted that as he did not know about the direction for depositing such cost, he cou ld not deposit the same on or before 30th March, 2010 and, therefore, he may not be penalized. Such averment of the petitioner has not been disputed by the res pondent. In view of the above, I am of the view that the petition er was prevented by sufficient cause in not depositing the cost within the time allowed. The petitioner shall now deposit the said cost of Rs.2000/- (Rupees Tw o Thousand) in the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, FTC, Dibrugar h in Money Appeal No.6/2007. The petitioner shall also pay the further cost of R s.3000/- (Rupees Three Thousand), thereby totaling Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousa nd). The said amount shall be deposited by 8th November, 2010 before the learned Court below and on such deposit, the same shall be released in favour of the re spondent. It is needless to say that in the event, the petitioner fails to deposit the said amount within the aforesaid period of time, this order shall automatically stand vacated and the Money Appeal No.6/2007 shall stand di smissed. In case such cost is deposited within the aforesaid peri od of time, the learned Court below shall make an endeavour to dispose of the ap peal as early as possible preferably within 3 (three) months from 8th November, 2010. The parties are directed to appear before the learned Court below on 8th November, 2010. The revision petition is accordingly disposed of. No co st.