Ramratna Singh, J.

1. This appeal by defendant No. 1 arises out of a suit for .partition which, was decreed by an Additional Subordinate Judge of Patna. The properties sought to be partitioned are two holdings situated within Patna Municipal Corporation, namely, old holding No. 101 corresponding to new holding No. 103 consisting of two blocks described, as northern kita and southern kita, and old holding No. 96 corresponding to new holding No. 98.

2. In order to appreciate the case, it is necessary to refer to the admitted genealogical table given below :-

430.htm

Defendants 1 to 14 are the only persons alive in this family at the time of the institution of the suit. It will be noticed that the common ancestor, Narain Sao, had three sons, namely, Kallar Sao, Mahadeo Sao and Makhan Sao. Defendant No. 12 is the son of Sundar Kuer, the daughter of Mahadeo Sao. This defendant had a full brother named Gopi Nath who died leaving a son who is defendant No. 13 and a widow who is defendant No. 14. Makhan Sao who died before 1902 had seven sons. The eldest son Saukhi had two wives; defendant Nos. 2 and 3 arc the sons through the second wife and defendants Nos. 4 and 5 are, respective