A final decree was entered August 7, 1967. From this decree the plaintiffs did not appeal but on September 7, 1967, filed their motion to vacate the decree which was denied after hearing on September 25, 1967. This is an appeal from the order denying the motion. There is no showing of clerical error, mistake, default through negligence, or other ground upon which it would have been proper to grant the motion. Thompson v. Goulding, 5 Allen, 81. Hyde Park Sav. Bank v. Davankoskas, 298 Mass. 421 .
Order denying motion to vacate decree affirmed.
Following the decision in this case in 353 Mass. 77 , the defendants filed a motion for counsel fees which by interlocutory decree was allowed in the amount of $2,000. The plaintiff appealed both from this and from a final decree after rescript. Subsequently, this court decided Chartrand v. Riley, ante, 242, which in effect overruled Stiles v. Municipal Council of Lowell, 233 Mass. 174 , Ashton v. Wolstenholme, 243 Mass. 193 , and Malloy v. Carroll, 287 Mass. 376 . See Klass v. Wirtz, ante, 246. The interlocutory decree was in error in awarding counsel fees, and is reversed. The final decree is modified by striking out the award of counsel fees, and as so modified is affirmed.