ORDER :

R.C. Lahoti and Brijesh Kumar, JJ.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

The petitioner herein is the respondent in the regular first appeal before the High Court. In this order we will refer to the parties as they are arrayed in the High Court.

2. By the impugned order, M.V. Sundar Raj v. Trishala, Regular First Appeal No. 329 of 2001, Order dated 28-5-2002 the High Court has condoned 861 days' delay in filing the regular first appeal and directed the appeal to be listed for hearing on the question of admission. Feeling aggrieved by such order, the respondent in the High Court has filed this petition seeking special leave to appeal.

3. The first appeal in the High Court is by the defendants against an ex-parte decree of the trial court. It appears that the defendants were proceeded ex-parte from the very beginning. The suit property is an immovable property. The ex-parte decree directs declaration of title, delivery of possession and ascertainment of mesne profits. According to the appellants the summons in the suit were not served on them and they were not aware of the suit or the ex-parte decree passed therein. On becoming aware of the ex-parte decree they obtained ce