The appellant is the second defendant in O.S.No.184 of 1982 on the file of learned Subordinate Judge of Villupuram. On 10. 1982 the suit was decreed exparte against him. Thereupon he came forward with I.A.No.469 of 1987 under 0.9, Rule 13, C.P.C. to set aside the exparte decree against him on the allegation that he was not served with any summons in the suit. He came to knowof thesuit for the first time only on 11,7.1987 when the notice of the execution was received. His claim was contested by the plaintiff on the ground that there was service of summons by affixture and this plea is set out by the appellant only in order to avoid giving proper explanation for his nonappearance. The court below has negatived the contention of the appellant and dismissed his application with cost. And this appeal is directed against the said order.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that he was not served with summons in the case and he became aware of the decree only when notice in execution proceedings was received by him and that the court below instead of addressing itself to the question whether there was sufficient cause for his non-appearance when the suit was called on