IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. ORDER 24.4.2009. S.B. CIVIL MISC. APPEAL NO.1356/2008 Ballabh Enterprises Vs. Shahbuddin HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Shri Kapil Totla, for the appellant. Shri J.P.Goyal, for the respondent. Heard learned counsel for the parties. This appeal has been preferred against the order dated 8.2.2008 passed by the learned court below whereby the application filed by the defendant appellant under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was dismissed. This court while issuing the notices had directed the defendant appellant to deposit a sum of Rs.1 lac and furnish solvent security for the balance amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court and in the event of said condition being fulfilled the execution of the decree was to remain stayed. Since the main grievance of the plaintiff was with regard to the defendant avoiding the decree and not paying the amount and delaying the execution, this SB CMA No.1356/2008 court has thought it proper to secure the interest of the plaintiff by passing the aforesaid conditional order while issuing the notice on 3.4.2008. In the facts and circumstances therefore having secured the interest of the plaintiff in the present case as the defendant appellant had been served and he had put in appearance before the learned trial court and had appointed a counsel also to defend the suit who had failed to file the written statement hence the suit was ordered to be proceeded exparte against the defendant appellant. I am of the view that looking to the facts which have come on record interest of justice would be served after having secured the interest of the plaintiff, if an opportunity is given to the defendant appellant to defend the suit. The amount which has been deposited by the defendant appellant shall be kept in Fixed Deposit to abide the final decision of the suit, the solvent security which has been furnished shall also remain in force during the pendency of the suit and in case the suit is decreed the plaintiff would be entitled for releasing of the amount by proceeding against the defendant or against the surety for satisfaction of the decree. It is further directed that the parties would appear before the learned trial court on 25.5.2009 on which the date SB CMA No.1356/2008 the defendant appellant would be permitted to file written statement by the learned trial court and no further opportunity shall be granted by the learned trial court in this behalf as the defendant appellant had been afforded reasonable opportunity from 1.3.2005 to 7.7.2005 by the learned trial court for filing written statement. The appeal as well as the stay application are accordingly disposed of. (DALIP SINGH),J. Ramchandrkhatri,PS