IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 FAO.No. 296 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19/12/2007 IN IA 1193/07 IN OS.59/2002 of SUB COURT, VADAKARA .................... APPELLANT/ PETITIONER/ DEFENDANT ----------------------------------------------------- K.K.RAJAMANI, S/O.GOPALAN NAMBIAR, AGED 44 YEARS, CLERK, PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK, KUTHUPARAMBA, THALASSERY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT/ PLAINTIFF --------------------------------------------------------- A.M.ASOKAN,S/O.GOPALAN, AGED 53 YEARS, VANI NIVAS, P.O.AZHIYOOR, AZHIYOOR AMSOM DESOM, VATAKARA TALUK. ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNAN FOR R1 SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY FOR R1 THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.Raman & P.S.Gopinathan, JJ. ================================== F.A.O.No.296 of 2008 ================================== Dated this the 3rd day of April 2009. JUDGMENT Raman,J. This appeal is filed against the order in I.A.No.1193 of 2007 in O.S.No.59 of 2002 on the file of the Sub Court, Vadakara, by the petitioner seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree passed against him on terms. According to the appellant, the condition imposed by the order impugned is onerous. The plaint claim is about Rs.5 lakhs. Admittedly, there was delay in filing an application to set aside the ex-parte order. The court below considered all the aspects of the matter. The court below, after considering the contention raised in the application for setting aside the ex-parte order, held that the court had allowed the application earlier directing to deposit an amount of Rs.20,000/- against which the petitioner preferred a writ petition before this F.A.O.No.296 of 2008 -:2:- Court and this Court modified the order permitting him to produce security for the above. Security was furnished and ex-parte order was set aside. Again, the suit was listed and again the petitioner/appellant absented himself. Therefore, this was the second occasion where he is seeking to set aside the ex-parte decree passed against him. In such circumstances, the court had ordered that this time, the application can be allowed only on terms and an amount of Rs.30,000/- is directed to be paid on or before 18.1.2008. The petitioner instead of complaining the said order, challenged the order as mentioned earlier in different proceedings and ultimately by filing this appeal. More than a year have elapsed after the order was passed. We do not find that any error of jurisdiction or error of law in the condition imposed to deposit the amount of Rs.30,000/- in the factual circumstances of the case. Hence, there is no merit in this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. Though the petitioner had enough time to F.A.O.No.296 of 2008 -:3:- make the deposits, in the meantime, taking a lenient view, we grant two month's time to deposit the amount and thus to comply with the conditions imposed by the order impugned in this appeal. Accordingly, we direct that in case the petitioner/appellant deposits the amount of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty thousand only) before the court below on or before 2nd June 2009, the ex- parte decree passed against him will stand set aside. P.R.Raman, Judge. P.S.Gopinathan, Judge. css/