IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRDESH:: HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND ELEVEN PRESENT:: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.904 OF 2010 Between: Mohammad Mohaboob …Petitioner A n d Smt. Shamshunnisa and two others ..Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY C.R.P.No.904 OF 2010 ORDER: This civil revision petition is directed against the order dated 18-02-2010 in I.A.No.1 of 2010 in O.S.No.1708 of 2007, on the file of X-Additional Senior Civil Judge (FTC), Hyderabad, wherein the said application filed by the petitioner herein, the defendant, for setting aside the ex parte decree dated 19-12-2009, was allowed subject to condition that the petitioner-defendant shall deposit Rs.54,000/- towards damages for use and occupation with a further observation that the said amount will be received by the successful party after decree. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner- defendant and learned counsel for the respondents- plaintiffs. Perused records. 3. The respondents/plaintiffs filed a suit for eviction of the petitioner/defendant from the schedule house and for recovery of possession and also for damages for use and occupation. The petitioner/defendant filed a written statement contesting the suit. Necessary issues were settled and the trial of the suit was taken up. When the matter was coming up for the cross-examination of P.W.1, the plaintiffs did not turn up and the Court recorded the cross-examination as ‘nil’ and posted the mater for further evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs. At that stage, the matter underwent several adjournments. On 04-12-2010, the plaintiffs filed an affidavit-in-chief and also some documents and the suit was adjourned to 10-12-2009 on payment of costs of Rs.100/-. On 10-12-2009, both the counsel were absent and the suit was posted to 17-01- 2010 and on that day the defendant was set exparte. In fact, the mater was coming up for further evidence of the plaintiff and for filing of certain documents by the plaintiffs. The defendant filed an application in I.A.No.1 of 2010 for setting aside the ex parte decree on the ground that he could not attend the Court on 17-12-2009 as he wrongly noted the date as 27-12-2009. The plaintiff filed a counter opposing the said application. The trial Court, by the impugned order, allowed the said application, but subject to condition that the defendant shall deposit Rs.54,000/- into Court, the amount claimed as damages in the suit. Aggrieved by the said condition imposed by the trial Court, the present civil revision petition is filed. 4. The trial court has rightly allowed the application for setting aside the ex parte decree with a view to give an opportunity to the defendant to contest the suit. The plaintiffs have not filed any civil revision petition questioning the same. It is, therefore, not necessary to go into the merits of the matter. 5. The only question that remains for consideration is - whether the condition imposed by the trial Court directing the defendant to deposit Rs.54,000/- is onerous in nature? 6. The plaintiff claimed the said amount of Rs.54,000/- by way of damages for use and occupation in the suit. By directing the defendant to deposit the said amount into Court, the trial Court has virtually granted a decree in favour of the plaintiff without trial, of course, with an observation that the party found ultimately successful would receive the said amount. Be that as it may, the very direction to the defendant to deposit the entire amount claimed by the plaintiff as damages, even at the threshold of the trial, is certainly onerous in nature, especially when the defendant was set ex parte for his absence on 17-12-2009, on which date his presence was not required, in fact, inasmuch as the matter was coming up for further evidence of the plaintiffs and for filing of documents by the plaintiffs. It is, therefore, considered that the ends of justice would be met by directing the defendant to pay costs of Rs.1,000/- to the plaintiff before the trial Court for setting aside the ex parte decree, instead of directing him to deposit the amount of Rs.54,000/- claimed in the suit by way of damages within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. 7. The civil revision petition is disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. _____________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J 18th January, 2011 Lrkm/Ksp.