AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
M.N. Krishnan, J.—This writ petition is filed with a prayer to set aside the cost portion of the order which was imposed for setting aside the ex parte decree.
Learned Counsel for the writ Petitioner submits before me that in a suit foi specific performance, on account of the poor financial circumstance, die writ petitions was not able to come over and contest the case, which resulted in the ex parte decree. The court below merely on the representation that the advocate fee Rs. 15,000 has been paid, allowed the application to set aside the ex parte decree.
I think it is a very harsh decision imposed on the writ Petitioner. In our Society the court has got a duty to look into the financial constraints of the litigants as well and by using the discretionary jurisdiction if the court imposes a tam, which virtually amounts to deprivation of justice, then the system will have to suffer for the same. It is submitted that the writ Petitioner is in a very poor financial position and some leniency has to be shown. On a perusal of the materials available, I feel the quantum of cost in this case has to be reduced.
Therefore, I reduce the cost to Rs. 2,500 instead of Rs. 15,000. I further grant time to die Petitioner for paying the cost till 18-2-08. On payment of the said cost, the court shall set aside the ex parte decree and try to proceed with the matte and dispose it of in accordance with law.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.