JUDGMENT 1. - Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that the court below acted illegally and with material irregularity in imposing cost of Rs. 200 when the petitioner moved an application under O. VI R. 5 CPC and thereafter on the date on which he filed written statement, in the sum of Rs. 300. Since the written statement has been filed, there was absolutely no justification and power in the court to impose costs on the petitioner. A court's power to impose cost is to be exercised only when the ends of justice require but this should not be imposed arbitrarily and whimsically. In the instant case, the court acted whimsically in ordering payment of costs on both the occasions. Consequently, these two orders dated 2.2.90 and 24.2.90 imposing sum of Rs. 200 and 300 on the petitioner are set aside. 2. It may be mentioned here that even before the court had imposed Rs.800 as cost on the petitioner while setting aside the ex-parte order. I would have set aside that order as well but as no such prayer is included in the revision, I refrain myself from doing so. 3. The revision is allowed. The orders of the court below dated 2.2.90 and 24.2.90 are set aside. The parties shall bear their own costs.Revision Allowed. *******