Madan Mohan Prasad, J.

1. This second appeal is directed against the dismissal of the plaintiffs suit for setting aside a decree on the ground of fraud and for recovery of possession of the properties involved.

2. Briefly stated, the plaintiffs case is that they were in possession of certain lands from which they were forcibly dispossessed by defendant No. 1 on the 15th January, 1956. It is said that the said defendant had claimed to have pur-chased those lands in an execution sale arising out of a suit for money filed by the defendant against the plaintiffs. It is their case that they had no knowledge either of the money suit or of the decree passed therein or the proceedings in execution arising therefrom. The processes in all those proceedings are alleged to have been suppressed fraudulently. On this allegation of fraud, the plaintiffs prayed in this suit for setting aside the aforesaid decree and the execution sale and in consequence thereof for restoration of possession of the properties to the plaintiffs. It is said that it was only after their dispossession in January, 1956, that they had made inquiries and learnt in February, 1956, about the aforesaid fraud. The sui