Judgment :- 1. The Petitioner is the forth defendant in O.S. No. 612 of 2004 on the file of the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1. Coimbatore. It is a Suit for Specific Performance of contract filed by the first/respondent and the Suit was decreed. Upon that, defendants 1 to 3 preferred an Appeal before this Court in A.S. No. 856 of 2005 and notice was ordered to the parties. This petitioner remained ex parte before the trial Court. He had not taken any steps either to file an application to set aside the ex parte decree or to prefer any Appeal before this Court or had filed any written statement before this Court. 2. At the outset, the appellant took notice to all the defendants but second batta with Petition was due for him for this respondent, Further, it was not paid on the presumption that since he remained ex parte before the Trial Court no notice need to be taken. This Court on 28.3.2007 took up the matter for hearing, heard the learned counsel for both sides and passed the judgment on merits. 3. Presently, the petitioner has come forward to set aside the above said judgment dated 28.3.2007. In the affidavit, the has stated that he was not served with any notice in the Appeal and the appellant in the Appeal had wantonly not taken any steps to serve notice upon him. This petitioner is son of the first defendant and brother of other defendants. This Court proceeded on the premise that since this petitioner remained ex parte before the Trial Court, notice was dispensed with and passed the judgment. Even though no notice was serve upon this petitioner in the Appeal, it is to be presumed that notice was dispensed with. 4. As already stated, he has not challenged the decree before this Court, Hence, even though it is ex parte decree against him, it is binding on him. He is one among the respondents in the Appeal. 5. In view of the above said circumstances, the Petition has to be unsuited for the relief sought for. In the result, the Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs.