ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.

( 1 ) IN this application correctness of orders passed by learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, First Court, Cuttack and learned Second Addl. District Judge, Cuttack, while dealing with acceptability of petition filed by petitioner under Order 9, Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short, the 'code') for setting aside ex parte decree passed against him in T. S. No. 677 of 1986, is questioned.

( 2 ) BACKGROUND facts undisputed essentially, are as follows:opposite Parties herein brought T. S. No. 677 of 1986 against one Moti Bewa for specific performance of contract. Consequent upon the death of Moti, petitioner was substituted as defendant in her place as she was stated to be adopted mother of the petitioner. He traversed pleadings of the plaintiffs by filing written statement; but did not take any steps after 12-3-1991. He was set ex parte, suit was heard on 5-4-1991 and 4-4-1991 in his absence, and judgment decreeing the suit ex parte was pronounced on 1-5-1991. After sealing and signing of the decree, plaintiffs deposited the balance consideration amount and took steps to get the requires sale deed executed through Court. Petitioner refused to rec