1 THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR ORDER S.B.CIVIL REVISION PETITION NO.73/2008. Jagdish Prasad Malani. VERSUS Rajkumar. 25.04.2008. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE DALIP SINGH Mr.Virendra Agrawal, for the petitioner. ***** Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. By the impugned order dated 15.03.2008, the learned trial court has allowed the application filed by the defendant/non- petitioner under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. setting aside the ex-parte decree dated 08.08.2003 for specific performance of the contract for sale of the agricultural land in favour of the plaintiff-petitioner. I have perused the impugned order as well as the application under Order 9 Rule 13 C.P.C. which has been filed. The application has been filed on the ground that neither the service was effected on the defendant/non-petitioner nor did he engage any counsel Dharampal Yadav nor gave him vakalatnama to appear in the said case on his behalf. The learned court below has taken the totality of the circumstances and has passed the impugned order setting aside the ex-parte decree on the cost of Rs.2,500/-. 2 I am satisfied that the impugned order does not call for any interference. Moreover, it was open for the petitioner to have persuaded the said counsel Shri Dharampal Yadav to have filed his affidavit before the learned trial court to substantiate the fact that he had been engaged by the defendant and the vakalatnama on behalf of the defendant was given to him for filing the written statement on instructions by the defendant. In the facts and circumstances, I am not inclined to exercise the revisional jurisdiction in this case. In the facts and circumstances, the revision petition as well as the stay application stand dismissed. (DALIP SINGH),J. Solanki DS, Jr.P.A.