ORDER

Lodge, J. - This rule was issued to show cause why an order passed u/s 174 (3), Ben. Ten. Act, should not be set aside.

2. The material facts are as follows. The landlord instituted a suit for assessment of rent; and for recovery of rent and obtained a decree. In execution of that decree, the holding was put to sale on 21st May 1942. The sale was confirmed in the ordinary way on 22nd June 1942. On 3rd July 1942, the auction-purchaser took out the sale certificate and, according to the record, obtained delivery of possession through Court on 2nd March 1943. On 12th June 1943 one of the tenant judgment-debtors filed two applications before the Court. One was an application under Order 9, Rule 13 and the other was an application u/s 174(3), Ben. Ten. Act. In these applications he asserted that he had been kept out of knowledge both of the decree and the sale and he had come to know of both of them on 3rd June 1943, The application under Order 9, Rule 13 was dismissed on 30th November 1943 and no appeal against the order of dismissal was preferred. The application u/s 174 (8), Ben. Ten. Act was dismissed by the Court of first instance on 21st February 1944. The learned Munsif found