( 1 ) WHETHER the findings, which were essentially findings of fact, given by the trial Court about the sufficient cause, having been made out by the defendants under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code) for restoring the suit, can be set aside by the revisional court under Section 115 of the Code, or only questions pertaining to the jurisdiction could have been gone into by the revisional Court and whether the grounds for condonation of delay under section 5 of the Limitation Act (for short the Act) could be re-examined by the Revisiona! Court are the short questions for consideration in the present petition filed by the defendants under article 226 of the Constitution seeking the relief for writ of certiorari quashing impugned order dated 7-9-1987 passed by IIIrd Additional District Judge, in revision.

( 2 ) THE portrayal of essential facts are these. The plaintiff? respondent No. 2 has filed Suit No. 337 of 1983 in the Court of Munsiff for permanent injunction restraining the defendants/present petitioners from realising the amount of pension already paid to him and the suit was decreed ex parte on 27-9-1985 as the defendants, prese