Horace Owen Compton Beasley, Kt., C.J.

1. The plaintiff obtained a decree for money against the 6th defendant. The 6th defendant died and his minor son was brought on record as his legal representative as 8th defendant. The decree-holder applied by E. A. No. 17 of 1929 for attachment of certain Immovable properties in the hands of the 8th defendant and notice was ordered on him. When the petition came on for hearing on the 29th January, 1929, in the absence of the 8th defendant who did not appear, the learned Subordinate Judge ordered attachment of the Immovable properties as prayed for by the decree-holder. Subsequently the 8th" defendant applied on the 2nd February, 1929, under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure to set aside that order on the ground that his non-appearance on the 29th January was due to the late appearance of his vakil. He alleged that his vakil had only been a minute late in appearing before the Court and that orders were passed by the learned Subordinate judge a minute before the said vakil came to Court. The decree-holder contended that the petition was not maintainable under any of the provisions of the Code. The learned Subordinate Judge