Defendants 4 to 6 in O.S. No. 13 of 1996, on the file of the Subordinate Judge’s Court at Hosur, are the revision petitioners.

2. Plaintiffs filed the above suit for partition. Even though the present suit is numbered as O.S. No. 13 of 1996, we find that the suit was instituted some time in the year 1986 as O.S. No.200 of 1986. Even though now it is ten years past since the institution of the suit, no progress has been made in the suit. Some of the defendants have filed written statement. Defendants 4 to 6 who have filed the present revision petition were declared ex parte on 13. 1987. They filed an application under O.9. Rule 7, C.P.C. praying that the ex parte order against them may be set aside. They also filed a written statement along with the application.

3. Court below, by the impugned order, dismissed the application, and the same is challenged in this revision.

4. One of the main reasons for dismissing the application is that the application is barred, and the petitioners have not shown good cause for setting aside the ex parte order.

5. The legality of the order is now challenged by the petitioners herein.

6. When the matter came for admission, learned Judg