( 1. ) IN the suit instituted by the revision-petitioners, April 2, 1968, was fixed for evidence of both the parties. On that date, the defendants counsel applied for adjournment on the ground that Shantibai and Ganpatrao were not able to attend the Court because of illness. Seven witnesses for the plaintiffs were present. The trial Court rejected the application for adjournment and at that stage counsel for the defendants reported no instructions and retired. The trial Court forthwith recorded evidence of the plaintiffs witnesses including the plaintiff himself and closed the case. On April 6, 1968, the trial Court delivered its judgment and passed a decree in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendants.

( 2. ) THE defendants made an application under Order 9, Rule 13, Civil procedure Code, for setting aside the ex parte decree. That was resisted by the plaintiffs. The trial Court rejected it by its order dated March 3, 1969.

( 3. ) THE defendants appealed. The learned Additional District Judge, raipur, allowed the appeal and set aside the ex parte decree.

( 4. ) WHEN this revision was initially laid before me for hearing parties, a preliminary question was raised by th