to be Sunday. Today none has come present on behalf of the respondent either to pay the costs or to file the written statement. On 15.9.06, on the basis of statement made by the decree holder with his counsel, the ex parte eviction order was ordered to be set aside subject to payment of costs of Rs.1000/- and the case was posted to 11.10.2006. However, on 11.10.2006 i.e. the adjourned date, neither written statement was filed nor costs paid and again today no body has come present on behalf of the respondent to pay the costs or to file the written statement. As the ex parte eviction order was set aside subject to payment of costs as above said, it is clear that payment of costs as imposed vide order dated 15.9.2006 was a condition precedent for setting aside of the ex parte ejectment order. However, since the amount of costs so imposed has not been paid and the condition imposed duly complied with, the said order dated 15.9.2006 ceased to operate. Still further, from the conduct of the respondent, it is clear that the application filed by him under Order 9 Rule 13 CPC was nothing but an act aimed at abusing the process of law and an attempt to thwart the execution of eviction orders and to gain as much time as he could, but his attempt having been aborted mid-
