Judgment :- COMMON ORDER The orders passed in I.A.No.175 of 2006 in O.S.No.1 of 2006, I.A.No.176 of 2006 in O.S.No.2 of 2006 and I.A.No.177 of 2006 in O.S.No.3 of 2006 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Ranipet are challenged under these revisions. 2. The above said interlocutory applications were filed under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC. In the said applications, the learned trial Judge has directed the petitioners/defendants to deposit 50% of the decree amount on or before 9. 2008. The petition filed by the revision petitioners/defendants for extension of time to comply with the said orders was also dismissed. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner. 4. I am of the view that in a petition under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC, directing the revision petitioners/defendants to deposit 50% of the decree amount requires interference. The defendants have raised defence in their written statement. Whether it is valid or not is a matter to be gone into only at the time of trial. Under such circumstances, I am of the view that an opportunity must be given to the defendants to defend the suit but by paying a cost of Rs.1000/- in each application referred to above. 5. In fine, these civil revision petitions are allowed and the orders passed in I.A.No.175 of 2006 in O.S.No.1 of 2006, I.A.No.176 of 2006 in O.S.No.2 of 2006 and I.A.No.177 of 2006 in O.S.No.3 of 2006 on the file of the Court of District Munsif, Ranipet respectively are modified as to the effect that those applications will be allowed on condition, the petitioner pays a sum of Rs.1000(Rupees One thousand )Only in each applications towards cost to the other side to be paid on or before 13. 2009 failing which these revisions shall deem to have been dismissed. On compliance of the above order, the learned trial Judge shall restore O.S.Nos 1 to 3 of 2006 on his file and dispose of the same in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Consequently, connected M.P.No.1 of 2009 is closed.