Gokal Chand Mital, J.

1. On 13th February, 1974, Dina Nath and other landlords filed a civil suit for ejectment of Karnail Singh tenant from a shop after the tenancy stood terminated. In that suit an ex parte decree of ejectment was passed on 21st September, 1974. On 3rd March, 1975 the petitioner-tenant filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Civil Procedure Code (`hereinafter called the Code), for setting aside the ex parte decree, wherein specific averments were made that a Bailiff came to the premises on 1st March, 1975 to execute the ejectment order from whom he came to know about the ex parte decree, then he went to the Court and found out from the file of the Court the detailed facts. In the application it was specifically pleaded that he was never served with the summons of the suit; that he never refused to accept notice and that the report of service of summons was fake and since he has not served, the ex parte decree deserved to be set aside. The landlords did not give specific reply and made evasive denial. Of course it was pleaded that service was effected and the application was time barred. On the issues framed in the case, the parties led evidence.