Raj Kishore Prasad, J.

1. This appeal, by the plaintiffs, is from a judgment of reversal, of the learned Subordinate Judge, Patna, who reversed the judgment and decree of the first Court, with respect to plot 1631, and, dismissed the suit in respect thereof.

2. We are concerned in this appeal only with plot 1631, and, not with plot 1632, in respect or which the judgment of the Trial Court was affirmed.

3. The (acts, material for the decision of the appeal, are these :

4. There was one Sheobhajan Singh, whose admitted first cousins are the plaintiffs. Sheobhajan Singh was admittedly separate from the plaintiffs. After the death of Sheobhajan Singh, a dispute arose, regarding his properties, between the plaintiffs and his widow, defendant No. 1, in thee Land Registration Department. Ultimately, there was a compromise between the parties on the 22nd August, 1941, as will appear from the compromise petition (Ext. 1). Under this compromise (Ext. 1) the land in suit, plot 1631, the admitted owner of which was Sheobhajan Singh, husband of defendant 1, was kept Ijmal between the plaintiffs and defendant 1, and, in the said plot, defendant 1 got 2/3rd and the plaintiffs got the rema