1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. APPEAL AGAINST ORDER NO. 78 OF 2007 (M/s. International Combustion (India) Limited .v. Tajpal Singh Gurucharan Singh Arora) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's Orders and Registrar's orders. Shri S.V. Bhutada, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri S.C. Mehadia, Advocate for the respondent. CORAM : B.R. GAVAI, J. 4TH FEBRUARY, 2008. Heard the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties. By way present appeal, the appellant challenges the order dated 17th November, 2006 vide which the application filed by the present appellant under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure came to be rejected. The respondent had filed a suit for recovery of amount. The said suit came to be decreed vide judgment and decree dated 28th September, 2004. Immediately, thereafter MJC No.285 of 2004 came to be filed. The same is rejected. Hence the present appeal. Shri S.V. Bhutada, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the suit came to be decreed exparte as the Counsel who was 2 engaged on behalf of the defendant had expired and, therefore, the suit could not be defended. He, therefore, submits that it is in the interest of justice that the opportunity should have been given to the appellant to defend the suit. Shri S.C. Mehadia, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent submits that the decree cannot be said to be an exparte decree inasmuch as the defendant was represented through his Counsel. From the perusal of the record, it is clear that the suit has been decreed without the present appellant being giving an opportunity of defending himself. It is also not in dispute that the Counsel who was engaged by the appellant was expired and, therefore, in these circumstances, the suit could not be defended by the defendant. In that view of the matter, I am inclined to allow the appeal. The appeal is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A). However, it is further directed that the present appellant shall deposit an amount of rupees three lakhs in the trial Court within a period of one week from today. On such deposit, the respondent would be at liberty to withdraw the said amount unconditionally. However, it is made clear that the said payment and withdrawal would be subject to the final decision of the 3 suit. Taking into consideration that the suit is old one, the learned trial Court is directed to expedite the suit as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of six months from today. The parties are directed to appear before the learned trial Court on 18th of February, 2008. In that view of the matter, formal notices to the parties would not be necessary. JUDGE *rrg.