JUDGMENT -R.J. KOCHAR, J.:---Heard Shri S.P. Kanuga, for the petitioner, No one appears for the respondent, though they are duly served. The only short point which is canvassed in this civil application which is pending for disposal from 1991, is that whether on setting aside an ex-parte decree any condition such as deposit of money can be passed. 2.In the civil suit which was filed before the trial Court by the plaintiff no writ of summons was served on the defendant i.e. the present petitioner. In spite of the fact that writ of summons was not served on the defendant, an ex-parte decree came to be passed. When the defendant came to know about the ex-parte decree, he had filed an application for setting aside the same. The learned Judge has in fact set-aside the ex-parte decree and allowed the application filed by the defendant-petitioner realising that when the writ of summons was not served on the defendant he could not remain present and therefore, no ex-parte orders could be passed in these circumstances. It is curious to note that the learned Judge has put a condition on the petitioner to deposit a sum of Rs. 10,000/- in the Court within one month from the date of the said order which was passed on 2-7-1991. He has not given any reason for such condition. According to me, when the writ of summons was not served at all no such condition can be put after setting aside the ex-parte decree. The defendant cannot be penalised for no fault of his. I therefore, quash and set aside the part of the impugned order directing petitioner to deposit Rs. 10,000/- in the Court and allow the civil revision application. No order as to costs. Application allowed. *****