S.J.HYDER, J.

1. The applicants were the defendants in the suit before the trial court. The court issued summons through a process server fixing Aug. 19, 1978 for the hearing of the suit. The summonses are said to have been refused by the defendant-applicant and thereafter, the court ordered to issue notice to the defendant-applicant to be sent through registered post. The notices sent to the defendant-applicants were also returned with an endorsement "refused". The trial court was of the opinion that the summons had been duly served on the defendants-applicants. It recorded the evidence in the case on Jan. 31, 1979 and an ex parte decree was passed on Feb. 5, 1979.

2. On July 20, 1979, the applicant moved an application for setting aside the ex parte decree passed on 5-2-1979. The application was dismissed by the trial court and then the defendant-applicant preferred an appeal against the said order. The order passed by the trial court was maintained by the court of appeal. The present revision has been filed against the said order.

3. The case of the defendant-applicant was that he was at Calcutta when the summonses were issued to him. He denied having refused to accept t