JUDGMENT Anjani Kumar Mishra, J. -- Heard Sri Brijesh Chandra Naik, counsel for the petitioner and Sri Anand Kumar Srivasavata, who has filed his appearance on behalf of the respondent no.2 in this writ petition. 2. The instant writ petition arises out of SCC Suit No.9 of 2013, filed by the respondent no.2 for arrears of rent and eviction. 3. It appears that the petitioner filed an application (paper No.100 Ga), alleging there in that he was a heart patient and had therefore been unable to deposit the amount of Rs.200/- towards cost for his oral testimony being recorded on commission. It was also stated that even the pairokar of the petitioner have been injured and therefore also the amount could not be deposited within time. Consequently his evidence had been closed. The order closing his evidence was therefore, liable to be recalled. The recall application was rejected and hence this petition. 4. The basic contention of counsel for the petitioner initially was and even today is that he may be granted one last opportunity to comply with the order for depositing Rs.200/- and thereafter his statement be recorded on commission subject to payment of costs which this Court may consider appropriate, to impose. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner had been permitted to serve the respondent outside Court. An affidavit of service has been filed on record. The respondent no.2 has put his appearance as noted above. 6. Learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the petitioner is only interested in keeping the matter pending and has been adopting dilatory tactics. 7. Upon hearing the counsel for the parties and upon a perusal of the record, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner may be granted one last opportunity to deposit the requisite costs and thereafter, his statement may be recorded on commission. 8. Under the circumstances, therefore, the order dated 12.07.2016 rejecting the recall application No.100 Ga is set aside, as is the order dated 03.05.2016, whereby the evidence of the petitioner has been closed, subject to the petitioner furnishing costs of Rs.10,000/- within a period of 10 days from today. The petitioner may also deposit the cost of Rs.200/- which was required to be deposited by him for his oral testimony being recorded on commission. 9. The petitioner may also deposit the cost of Rs.200/- which was required to be deposited by him for his oral testimony being recorded on commission. 9. In case, the costs specified above are deposited, the Court below may proceed in accordance with law after getting the statement of the petitioner recorded on commission. 10. In case, the costs are not deposited within the time specified, the applicant shall not be entitled to the benefit of this order and the petition shall be deemed to have been dismissed, without further reference to the Court. 11. Accordingly, and subject to the conditions above, this petition is allowed in part.