Jackson, J.

1. Appeal against an appellate order setting aside a Court sale.

2. The Principal District Munsif of Chingleput in C.M.P. No. 453 of 1920 dismissed the application of the present respondents under Order 21, Rule 90, holding that there was no evidence of fraud or irregularity. On appeal the District Judge found that the judgment-debtors had no cause for complaint on the score that lots 1 and 2 were sold for a low price, nor were they adversely affected as regards the remaining lot 3. There was therefore no substantial injury. He records no finding as to fraud apparently agreeing with the lower Court that there was no proof. He thus practically confirms the order under Order 21, Rule 90. But in his sixth paragraph he finds that the lower Courts orders on M.P. No. 230 of 1917 were not brought to the notice of the Court which directed the sale and inasmuch as the sale was in contravention of the orders under M.P. No. 230 of 1917, which were final, the sale must be set aside. This is to break fresh ground. The judgment-debtors cited the failure to bring the previous petition to the lower Courts notice as evidence of plaintiffs fraud - Affidavit in M.P. No. 453 of 1920,