K.Ahmad, J.

1. The suit which has given rise to this appeal by the defendants was for partition of immoveable properties described in detail in Schedules 1 and 2 of the plaint and for allotment of a separate takhta of -/8/- annas share therein to the plaintiff. Both the Courts below have decreed the suit. The parties thereto are admittedly members of a common family. Their common ancestor was one Sukan Mahton, who had two wives. By the first wife, he had a son, Loki Mahton, and Loki Mahton in his turn had a son, Ram Keshwar Mahton. By the second wife, Sukan Mahton had three sons, Girwar Mahton, Bundel Mahton and Mahabir Mahton. Bundel predeceased his father. Girwar died leaving a son, Kashi Mahton. Kashi Mahton is also now dead with out any issue. The plaintiff, Sonamati Kuer, is the widow of this Kashi Mahton. The third son, Mahabir Mahton, is defendant No. 1, and his sons and grandson have been impleaded as defendants 2 to 5.

2. In this Court the case has been argued oh; the admitted footing that on the date Kashi Mahton died, the heirs of Sukan Mahton by his second wife were inter se joint as contemplated, by the Mitakshara School of Hindu Law. The claim of the plaintiff