' Civil Revisions Nos.2962 of 2000 and 959 of 2001, are being decided together, as both involve common question of law and fact.
2. The petitioners had been proceeded ex parte, in the suit for declaration filed by the respondent No,1; it is the case of the petitioners in Civil Revision No1962 of 2000, that the date, on which the ex parte proceedings and the evidence has been recorded, was not a date of hearing, because the case was fixed for the filing of the written statement of respondent No,2; whereas on behalf of the other revision petitioner; who is the respondent No,2 in this revision, it is stated that in case the written statement was not filed, ex parte proceedings could not have been ordered, but at the best the defence could have been struck off, still, the respondent could participate in the proceedings to cross-examination the witnesses of the respondent No,1.
2. It is contended by both the learned counsel for the parties, that in any case even the ex parte evidence could not be recorded, until the issue was framed.
3. Be that as it may, during the course of arguments, learned counsel for the respondent No,1, has conceded to set aside the impugned orders subject to the payment of some reasonable costs.
' In the light of above, the impugned orders are set aside, the petitioners in both the civil revisions, are imposed costs of Rs,7,500, each to be paid to the respondent No,1, on the next date of hearing.
However, at this stage, Mr. N.A. Butt, Advocate for respondent No,1 states, that out of the above amount of Rs,15,000 a sum of Rs:5,000 should be deposited in some institution either Shaukat Khanum Hospital, or Ganga Ram Hospital or the Medial Centre of the Lahore High Court Bar Association. . The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 23-4-2002. In case the costs, if not paid as directed, these revisions would be deemed to have been dismissed. Revision petitions are accordingly allowed.