RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

1. Whether an order refusing to set aside an ex parte decree in a suit which was affirmed in appeal under Order XLIII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil procedure, for short, the Code, be challenged by taking recourse to revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 115 of the Code is the limited question which we are called up on to answer in this reference.

2. Ex parte decree was passed in the original suit against the petitioner who is the defendant. He filed application under Order IX Rule 13 of the Code to set aside the ex parte decree along with an application to condone the delay under Section 5 of the Limitation Act alleging that he was laid up due to illness while his presence was required by the trial court. The trial court by a common order dismissed both the applications. The petitioner carried the matter in appeal before the District Judge, Palakkad, who by the impugned order, dismissed the appeal. The petitioner challenged the order under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

3. The maintainability of the same was challenged by one of the respondents on the ground that the order refusing to set aside the ex parte order is subject to