JUDGMENT

1. This appeal is directed against an order of dismissal of an application for execution of a decree. The decree was made on the 5th November 1906. The first application for execution was made on the 12th October 1909. Notice under Or. 21, r. 22 was directed to issue, as more than a year had elapsed from the date of the decree. There is an entry, in the order-sheet of return of service, which states that notice was served duly. But, on the 15th December 1909, the application was dismissed for default, as neither the decree-holder nor the judgment-debtor was present. The second application for execution was made on the 15th July 1911. Notice was directed to issue on the judgment-debtors under Or. 21, r. 22. The entry in the order-sheet made on the 7th August 1911 recites that the notice had been duly served. On the 21st August 1911, the Court directed a writ of attachment to issue in respect of the immoveable properties of the judgment-debtors. There is an entry in the order-sheet that the writ had been served in due course. This was followed by an order for proclamation of sale. But the proclamation was not published and the case was again dismissed for default on the 16th