CR No. 2654 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 11.5.2009 Civil Revision No. 2654 of 2009 (O&M) Chhajjan Singh alias Sajjan Singh .. Petitioner v. Gian Singh and another .. Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH BINDAL Present: Mr. Vivek Salathia, Advocate for the petitioner. Rajesh Bindal J. Challenge in the present petition is to the order dated 16.2.2009, passed by the learned court below, whereby the application for restoration of the suit, which was allowed by the learned court below subject to payment of Rs. 1,500/- as cost, was dismissed on account of non-payment thereof. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a very poor person, who is making his both hands meet with great difficulty. On the date fixed, he could not arrange for Rs. 1,500/- for payment of cost to the respondents and a short adjournment was sought therefor. In the interest of justice, the learned court below should have exercised its jurisdiction in favour of the petitioner on equitable consideration as the petitioner had already completed his evidence and his meritorious case would be thrown out merely for a small fault on his part which was because of the circumstances beyond his control. For the view I am taking, I do not deem it appropriate to issue notice to the respondents as the same would unnecessarily delay disposal of the present petition and the respondents will have to incur unnecessary further costs. No doubt, the learned court below vide order dated 10.1.2009 had allowed the application filed by the petitioner-plaintiff for restoration of the suit, which was dismissed in default subject to payment of Rs. 1,500/- as cost. The cost having not been paid, the application was dismissed vide impugned order dated 16.2.2009. A perusal of order dated 10.1.2009 shows that the respondents- defendants had conceded to the restoration of the suit subject to payment of cost. No doubt, in case the cost is not paid, the same being conditional, the application for restoration was required to be dismissed. However, in a case where there were CR No. 2654 of 2009 [2] certain unavoidable circumstances on account of which cost was not paid and adjournment was sought, the court could also consider the facts and circumstances and grant further opportunity for payment of cost. Considering the pleading of the petitioner that he is a poor person, as a matter of indulgence, I grant him one opportunity to pay cost already imposed by the learned court below as a condition for restoration of the suit and further burden him with cost of Rs. 1,500/- for his default. The petitioner will now appear before the learned court below on 23.5.2009. The learned court below may summon the respondents-defendants and after summoning them, the cost shall be payable to them on the very first date. However, it is made clear that in case of failure, the revision petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed. The revision petition is disposed of in the manner indicated above. (Rajesh Bindal) Judge 11.5.2009 mk