P.B.Mukharji, J. - (1.) In this matter, a second appeal had been filed which has since been dismissed as being incompetent. The present application under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure now remains to be disposed of.
(2.) The application arises out of an order setting aside an auction sale held by the Court on the ground of fraud in suppressing the process and summons of the Court in respect of the sale held. It has been found by both the Courts as a fact that there were material irregularity and fraud in publishing and conducting the sale. That finding of fact, supported both by oral and documentary evidence on record, cannot now be questioned in this application.
(3.) The only point argued by Mr. Lala Hemanta Kumar for the petitioner is that the lower appellate Court was wrong in not holding that the application to set aside the sale was barred by limitation under Section 18 of the Limitation Act. His main argument on Section 18 of the Limitation Act follows from the following language used in that section :-- " Where any person having a right to institute a suit or make an application has by means of fraud, been kept from the knowledge of such right or of the title on which it is founded or where any document necessary to establish such right has been fraudulently concealed from him, the time limited for instituting a suit or making an application- (a) against the person guilty of the fraud or (sic) (b) against any person claiming through him otherwise than in good faith and for a valuable consideration, shall be computed from the time when the fraud first became known to the person injuriously affected thereby, or, in the case of the concealed document when he first had the means of producing it or compelling its production ".;