( 1 ) A suit under Section 229-B of the U. P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act was filed by binda and Lalita transferors of respondent No. 6 against the petitioner and other defendants. The suit was decreed. An appeal was filed by the petitioner, which was allowed, and the suit was remanded to the trial court for fresh decision. According to the petitioner the suit was dismissed in default but it was restored on 26. 10. 1976 and that it was again dismissed on 21. 4. 1977 but was restored on 18. 8. 1977 and that thereafter on that date itself the trial court passed a compromise decree. The factum of restoration as well as of the compromise between the parties is disputed by shri Rahul Sripat counsel for respondent No. 6. This dispute about the facts however does not have any bearing on the controversy requiring decision in this writ petition and therefore the dispute about these facts can be left here. An application for setting aside the compromise decree was filed by respondent No. 6 on 2. 5. 2000, which was allowed by the trial court by its order dated 24. 6. 2002. The trial court took the view that no notice was served upon the respondent No. 6 the tra