1 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11830/2009. Braj Kishore. VS Raj Kishore & Ors. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11830/2009. Braj Kishore. VERSUS Raj Kishore and Others. 06.01.2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Mr.Asgar Khan, for the petitioner. Mr.Vinod Singhal, for the respondents. ***** The matter comes up on the application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India for vacating the ex-parte stay order passed by this court on 18.09.2009 by which the further proceedings before the trial court had been stayed. Since the matter involved hearing of arguments on merits, with the consent of the parties, the writ petition itself was heard. By the impugned order, the evidence of the petitioner-defendant-applicant who had filed the application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. for setting aside the ex-parte decree had been closed by the learned trial court as several opportunities have been given by the learned trial court to the petitioner for adducing evidence in support of the application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. but the defendant-petitioner failed to do so. 2 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11830/2009. Braj Kishore. VS Raj Kishore & Ors. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner was ill and in support of the same the petitioner has placed before this court the documents in the form of Annexures-3 to 4 showing that the petitioner was at the relevant time suffering from a decease which prevented him from appearing before the court to lead evidence. In support of the writ petition, the petitioner has also filed his affidavit. This affidavit has been sworn at Jaipur which shows that the petitioner was fit enough to travel from Bharatpur to Jaipur. In the facts and circumstances, therefore, there was no difficulty for the petitioner to have appeared before the court at Bharatpur. Be that as it may, last opportunity is granted to the petitioner to lead evidence before the learned trial court in support of his application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. on payment of cost of Rs.1,000/- as a pre- condition to the plaintiffs/non-petitioners. It is directed that on the next date which is already fixed before the learned trial court, the petitioner along with his other witnesses would appear and tender evidence in support of the application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. It is made clear that no further opportunity would be granted in this regard. Consequently, the writ petition stands disposed of, as above. The impugned order is set aside and the 3 S.B.CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.11830/2009. Braj Kishore. VS Raj Kishore & Ors. application under Article 226(3) of the Constitution of India stands allowed, as aforesaid. The interim order dated 18.09.2009 stands vacated. (DALIP SINGH),J. Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.