THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY CIVIL REVISION PETITION No.4126 of 2010 Date: 16.12.2010 Between: Duvvu Seetharam ..... Petitioner AND Puppala Gangadhararao and others .....Respondents Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri D. Ramalingaswamy Counsel for Respondents: Sri M. Ram Mohan The Court made the following: ORDER: This Civil Revision Petition arises out of the order dated 17.07.2010 passed in I.A.No.617 of 2009 in O.S.No.34 of 2009 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Srikakulam District, whereby while setting aside the ex parte decree, the Court below has imposed the condition that the petitioner shall pay costs of Rs.16,781/-. In my opinion, the Court below has failed to exercise sound discretion in ordering huge costs of Rs.16.781/-, which obviously reflected the ultimate costs in the event of suit being decreed. Under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the Court is vested with the discretion to set aside the ex parte decree “upon such terms as to costs”. The language of this provision clearly vested discretion in the Court as to the terms as to costs. Such discretion requires to be exercised in a reasonable manner. The Court below, while imposing the costs, has obviously taken into consideration the costs payable by the defendants in the event of the suit being decreed. In my opinion, such an approach cannot be appreciated. Accordingly, the order of the Court below to the extent of imposing costs of Rs.16,781/- representing the suit costs is set aside. Instead, the said costs are substituted with Rs.2,500/- (Rupees two thousand and five hundred only) payable by the defendants towards costs for allowing the I.A. Subject to the above modification, the Civil Revision Petition is disposed of. As a sequel to disposal of the C.R.P., C.R.P.M.P.No.5489 of 2010 filed by the petitioner for interim relief is disposed of as infructuous. ________________________ C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 16th December, 2010 GHN