JUDGMENT : Ajay Mohan Goel, J. By way of this petition, the petitioner/defendant has challenged order, dated 05.04.2019, vide which, an application filed by the petitioner herein before the Court of learned Civil Judge, Court No. 1, Solan, District Solan, H.P., i.e., CMA No. 81-6 of 2019 in Civil Suit No. 117/2017 (115/10/2017) under Order IX, Rule 7 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for recalling order, dated 09.04.2018, vide which, said petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte by the learned Trial Court, was dismissed. 2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the impugned order as well as other documents appended with the petition. 3. It is not in dispute that despite service, petitioner did not put in appearance before the learned Trial Court, which led to the passing of the order, dated 09.04.2008, vide which, the present petitioner, who is sole defendant before the learned Trial Court, was ordered to be proceeded against ex-parte. The suit which has been filed by the respondent herein against the petitioner is a suit for recovery. After proceeding against the present petitioner ex-parte, the case is pending adjudication before the learned Trial Court and is at the stage of recording the evidence of the plaintiff. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that as the case is still at the stage of recording the evidence of the plaintiff, therefore, it will be in the interest of justice in case the impugned order is set aside and the petitioner is permitted to join the proceedings. He has further submitted that the respondent/plaintiff can be compensated by imposing reasonable cost upon the petitioner. 5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-plaintiff has argued that there is no infirmity with the impugned order, as the learned Trial Court has rightly rejected the application filed under Order IX, Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure, because the petitioner had not approached the learned Trial Court with clean hands for having the order recalled vide which the petitioner was proceeded against ex-parte. It is not in dispute that before filing the application under Order IX, Rule 7 of the Code, which resulted in the passing of impugned order by the learned Trial Court, earlier an application was filed with the same prayer by the petitioner through its counsel, in which, the explanation which was given as to why none appeared before the learned Trial Court on 09.04.2018, was different from the one which was given in the subsequent application. However, in my considered view, this Court cannot ignore the fact that generally such applications are prepared more at the behest of learned counsel representing the parties, rather than instructions so imparted to them. As it is not in dispute that the case is still at the stage of recording the evidence of the plaintiff, in my considered view, it will be in the interest of justice in case the petitioner is permitted to join the proceedings before the learned Trial Court by setting aside the ex-parte order and by giving an opportunity to the petitioner to file the written statement. The interest of the respondent/plaintiff can be taken care of by imposing cost upon the petitioner, which will also act as a deterrent. 6. Accordingly, this petition is allowed. Order, dated 05.04.2019, vide which, the application filed by the petitioner herein under Order IX, Rule 7 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside ex-parte order, dated 09.04.2018, is set aside, however, subject to payment of cost of Rs.25,000/- by the petitioner to the respondent plaintiff. Said cost shall be paid by the petitioner to the respondent-plaintiff on or before the next date of hearing by way of a Bank Draft. Thereafter, learned Trial Court shall give one opportunity of at least four weeks to the petitioner to file the written statement to the plaint. Thereafter, the matter shall be decided by the learned Trial Court in accordance with law. It is clarified that in case the cost is not paid by the petitioner, in terms of the order passed by this Court today, then the opportunity given by this Court to the petitioner to join the proceedings shall cease to exist and the impugned order shall automatically stand revived. It is clarified that in case the cost is not paid by the petitioner, in terms of the order passed by this Court today, then the opportunity given by this Court to the petitioner to join the proceedings shall cease to exist and the impugned order shall automatically stand revived. It is further clarified that after payment of cost, in case the petitioner does not files the written statement within the time granted by the learned Trial Court, then no further opportunity in this regard, under any circumstance, shall be granted by the learned Trial Court to the petitioner. Parties to appear before the learned Trial Court on 30th October, 2019. Petition stands disposed of in above terms, so also pending miscellaneous applications, if any. Copy dasti.