ORDER 1. With the consent of parties, matter is finally heard. 2. This petition filed under Article 227 of Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 19.9.2014 and 12.12.2014, whereby the application of petitioner preferred under Order 9 rule 7 read with section 151 CPC is rejected by the Court below. It is contended by Shri Bhardwaj that the petitioner entered appearance before the Court below in the proceedings in question. However, after filing of Vakalatnama on 5.4.2014, the Court below fixed the matter for settlement between parties. By drawing the attention of this Court on various proceedings from 13.5.2014 onwards, it is contended that the matter was continuously fixed for settlement between the parties till 19.9.2014. On the said date, the Court below suddenly proceeded ex parte against the petitioner. He submits that if settlement was not possible, in the interest of justice, one opportunity should have been given to the petitioner to file written statement and contest the matter. He submits that Court below has erred in rejecting the application Annexure P-4. 3. Shri Mangal supported the order. He submits that ample opportunities were given to the petitioner for filing written statement and contest the matter. His application, Annexure P-4 was not pregnant with any medical certificate and therefore the Court below has not erred in rejecting the said application. 4. I have heard the parties and perused the record. 5. Perusal of ordersheets of the Court below shows that petitioner appeared in various proceedings before 19.9.2014, the date on which the Court proceeded ex-parte against him. I find substance in the argument of Shri Mangal that nothing prevented the petitioner to file written statement, yet it is seen that it is not a case of chronic absence before the Court below. The petitioner has assigned a reason of ailment of his sister on 19.9.2014. 6. In the peculiar facts of this case, I deem it appropriate to permit the petitioner to participate in the proceedings, subject to payment of cost. 7. Resultantly, the impugned order Annexure P-1 and P-2 dated 19.9.2014 and 12.12.2014 are set aside, subject to payment of Rs.3,000/- as cost to the plaintiff. If cost is paid, the ex parte order stands set aside. The Court shall proceed from said stage in accordance with law. 8. 7. Resultantly, the impugned order Annexure P-1 and P-2 dated 19.9.2014 and 12.12.2014 are set aside, subject to payment of Rs.3,000/- as cost to the plaintiff. If cost is paid, the ex parte order stands set aside. The Court shall proceed from said stage in accordance with law. 8. Shri Bhardwaj undertakes to file written statements within three weeks, if ex parte order is set aside. 9. With the aforesaid, petition stands disposed of. Anand V. Bhardwaj for petitioner; M. B. Mangal for respondent.