Devadoss, J.

1. This is a suit by the plaintiffs, for setting aside the decree, in O.S. No. 374 of 1915 on the ground of fraud. The District Munsif decreed the suit, as regards items 2 and 8 of the plaint on the ground that the decree in the previous suit was vitiated by fraud and that it was not binding on the plaintiffs. The Subordinate Judge of Kurnool has reversed that decree and has dismissed the plaintiffs suit. The Second Appeal related only to items 2 and 3 of the plaint.

2. Mr. C.S. Venkatachariar for the appellants contends that the decree in the previous suit was vitiated by fraud, inasmuch as the plaintiff brought a suit false to his knowledge, that the 3rd defendant trespassed upon the property belonging to him. It is conceded by him that where a judgment has been obtained by perjured evidence, a subsequent suit will not lie to sot aside that judgment. This point was set at rest by the Full Bench decision in Kadirvelu Nainar v. Kuppuswamy Naicker (1918) 41 Mad. 743. In that case, the learned Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Sadasiva Ayyar and Mr. Justice Spencer held that the decision, in Venkatappa Naick v. Subba Natch (1906) 29 Mad. 179 was wrongly decided and that a