Devi Prasad Singh, J.—Heard Sri D. C. Jain, holding brief of Sri H. S. Sahai, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri P. L. Mishra for opposite party No. 2. None present for opposite party No. 3.

2. According to the learned counsel for the parties plaintiff/opposite party No. 2 entered into an agreement with one Ram Krishna Giri on 15.12.1979 for sale of certain agricultural land. However, the land was purchased by the defendant/petitioners from Ram Krishna Giri on 6.10.1981. Accordingly a suit for specific performance of contract was filed by the plaintiff/opposite party No. 2. The suit was decreed without effective service of notice on defendant, on 27.7.1982. The trial court while decreeing the suit directed for execution of sale deed in favour plaintiff by the decree dated 27.7.1982. Defendant/petitioners filed application under Order IX Rule 13 of C.P.C. in September, 1982, for setting aside the ex parte decree and for decision on merit. The trial court had allowed the application by the judgment and order dated 27.5.1983 on payment of cost to the tune of Rs. 25. The finding of the trial court is that a notice was affixed over the house of defendant/petitioners. A