APALOO C.J.
The suit which culminated in this appeal was an application by the respondent to set aside a judgment obtained against him by default. His professed ground for seeking this relief was that neither the writ of summons nor the default judgment was served on him. The appellant disputed this and issue was joined on the facts.
The judgment sought to be vacated was delivered some time in 1967. Evidence was produced by both sides and the resolution of the issue raised a simple question of fact. The learned judge said he “had no hesitation whatsoever in disbelieving the applicant’s (meaning the respondent’s) assertion that he was not served with the writ of summons and with the 1967 default judgment.” In other words, the judge was satisfied with the appellant’s evidence that the respondent was served not only with the writ of summons but with the default judgment as well. By this finding, the pedestal on which the respondent sought to vacate the judgment was gone and ordinarily, his…