Kanhaiyaji, J.

1. This is an appeal by defendants 1 to 6 from the decision of the court below decreeing the plaintiffs suit for partition in respect of the lands of one mauza Berasi. The relationship between the parties is not disputed. According to the genealogy given in Schedule I of the plaint, one Ritu Mahto, the common ancestor of the parties, had three sons, namely, Saharai, Jogu and Sonaram. Sridhar and Sudan were the sons of Saharai, while Gangadhar, the father of Jhabu Mahto (defendant No. 9), was the son of Jogu. Gurucharan, the husband of Shrimati Mahatani (plaintiff No. 4), and Bidyadhar Mahto the husband of Shrimati Adin Mahatani (plaintiff No. 7), were the sons of Sonaram, besides Nitai Chandra Mahto, plaintiff No. 1. Dasrath, defendant No. 1 (since deceased) and Chutu, defendant No. 2, were the sons of Sridhar.

2. The plaintiffs case, in short, Is that originally the lands described in Schedule 2 of the plaint which are situated in five villages, namely, Haiturildih, Berasi, Heshalong, Dulmi and Shyam nagar, belonged to Ritu Mahto. After his death, his aforesaid three sons inherited them in equal shares. Consequently after the death of Saharai his l/3rd share