1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR -------------------------------------------------------- CIVIL WRIT No. 4015 of 2007 NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY V/S M.A.C.T., RAJSAMAND & ORS. Mr. SANJEEV JOHARI, for the appellant / petitioner Mr. S SARUPARIA, for the respondent Date of Order : 5.2.2009 HON'BLE SHRI N P GUPTA,J. ORDER ----- The matter comes on the application of the respondents No.2 to 5 under Article 226(3) for vacating the interim order passed by this Court on 10.7.2007, whereby notice of the writ petition was issued, so also of the stay petition, and interim stay was granted, to the effect, that if the petitioner deposits 50% of the awarded amount within one month, the execution of the ex-parte award shall stand stayed. However, it was also stipulated that if the amount so deposited shall not be disbursed to any of the claimants. It is not in dispute that the amount has been deposited within time. At this stage, learned counsel for the respondents No.2 to 5, who are the claimants submits that they are the only effected persons, who are suffering on account of the present writ petition, and since ex-parte award was passed by the learned trial Court on 19.12.2006, and as nobody 2 appeared on behalf of any of the defendants, and application under Order 9 Rule 13 had been filed only on behalf of the present writ petitioner, the service of other unserved respondents is not required to be awarded any further. It was then submitted that he being only effected person has no objection if the ex-parte award dated 19.12.2006 is set aside, and the matter is sent back to the learned trial Court to proceed further with the trial from the stage of 16.12.2006 i.e. allowing the petitioner the opportunity to lead its evidence, and thereafter, to decide the matter afresh since evidence of the writ petitioner only is to be led. Accordingly, with the consent of the claimants the writ petition is allowed at this stage itself. The impugned award dated 19.12.2006 is set aside, and the matter is remanded back to the learned trial Court to decide the matter afresh from the stage at which it was on 16.12.2006 i.e. allowing the insurer to lead its evidence, and to decide the matter afresh. Since the evidence of insurer only is to be led, the learned trial Court is also directed to decide the matter most expeditiously. The parties present to appear before the trial Court on 26.2.2009. This disposes of the application under Article 226(3) also. ( N P GUPTA ),J. /tarun/