Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

• The case involves a civil dispute where the appellants, who were tried and convicted in a criminal case, also faced a civil suit for damages filed by the respondents (!) .
• The appellants engaged legal counsel to defend them in the civil suit. During proceedings, the counsel reported "no instructions" on a specific date, leading to the appellants being proceeded ex-parte without prior notice to them (!) (!) .
• The appellants only became aware of the ex-parte order and decree after they inquired from their counsel several months later. They promptly filed an application to set aside the ex-parte order and decree (!) (!) .
• The trial court dismissed the application, and the appellants' subsequent appeals also failed. The higher courts dismissed their civil revision petition, leading to this appeal by special leave (!) (!) .
• The court emphasized that the appellants had engaged legal counsel and were actively following the proceedings. Since the counsel reported no instructions without issuing any notice to the appellants, it was unjust to hold them at fault for the ex-parte proceedings (!) .
• The court noted that the appellants acted promptly upon learning of the proceedings and were neither negligent nor careless in defending the suit. The failure to issue notice to the appellants was a procedural lapse that warranted setting aside the ex-parte order and decree (!) .
• The court referred to established principles that when a counsel reports "no instructions," and the party is not present or notified, the court should issue a notice before proceeding ex-parte. Failure to do so is contrary to principles of natural justice (!) .
• Based on these considerations, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the ex-parte order and decree, and remanded the case to the trial court to proceed from the stage where the proceedings were halted, ensuring justice is served (!) (!) .
• No costs were awarded, and the case was directed to be disposed of in accordance with law (!) .

Would you like a more detailed analysis or assistance with any specific aspect of this case?