2. It appears that the High Court file was lost and, thereafter with the consent of the parties, the records have been reconstructed and the appeal is being heard.

3. The plaintiff-respondents filed the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession with respect to 56 decimals of the suit property. The plaintiffs also claimed a sum of Rs.725/- deposited in the criminal Court in 145 Cr.P.C. proceeding and also prayed for mesne profit during the pendency of the suit. The amount of Rs.725/- has been withdrawn by the defendants.

4. The plaintiff-respondent claimed the aforesaid relief alleging that the plaintiffs are the karta of their respective families. A genealogical table has been mentioned giving the details of the family of the plaintiffs. There is no dispute about this genealogy. According to the plaintiffs, the disputed property was recorded in the name of B.B. Kolsum in the finally published record of rights in the year 1910. The same was within the Jamindari of ex-landlord Sheikh Gulam Kutubuddin Ahmad and Ors. In the remark column, it was shown as Bakabze Bhattu Gope since 8 years. Bhattu Gope remained in possession being temporary lessee till 1910 and, thereafter, he gave up his possession. The ex-landlord filed rent suit No.172 of 1915 for realization of arrears of rent against B.B. Kolsum in the Court of Munsif, Barh and obtained a decree. Then he filed execution case No.231 of 1916 in which the entire land including the suit land was auctioned sold. The decree holder purchased the suit property on 16.04.1917. After obtaining delivery of possession, the ex-landlord Sheikh Gulam Kutubuddin Ahmad permanently settled the suit land on 20.10.1924 along with other lands with one Mostt. Rasulan wife of Warsalli Miya of village Salimpur under a registered sale deed for agricultural purpose and put them in possession. She used to pay rent to the ex-landlord and was obtaining rent receipt. She executed registered mortgage deed on 12.04.1944 and then subsequently she redeemed it. She died in 1957 and her husband Warsali Miya inherited the property. He was mutated in the ex-landlord Sirista. For one year, he had given thika to Bado Ram. Warsali Miya died in1948 and, thereafter, his pre-deceased daughters son Wali Mohammed inherited the suit property and came in possession. The heirs of Warsali Miya mortgaged the suit land in favour of plaintiff No.1 through registered mortgage deed dated 04.09.1961 for Rs.1,000/- and subsequently they sold the property by registered sale deed dated 10.08.1962 and since then the plaintiffs are continuing in joint possession of the suit property as owner thereof.

5. According to the plaintiff’s, the Sikmi interest of Bhattu Gope extinguished long ago. Bhattu Gope died in 1923 and his Sikmi interest automatically came to an end. Thus, the defendants had no interest or concerned with the suit property. For the first time, after enactment of Bataidari Act, they without any right title and interest started creating trouble in the peaceful possession of the plaintiff and in 1965 they got a proceeding started claiming falsely that suit property has been partitioned between the 3 sons of Bhattu Gope and the suit land has been allotted in the share of Baiju Gope, the father of defendant No.1. In the said proceeding under Section 145 Cr.P.C. wrongly and illegally possession of the defendant 1st party was declared on 25.09.1965 and the revision against said order filed by the plaintiff was dismissed on 30.08.1967. On the basis of aforesaid Judgment and Orders, the defendant 1st party dispossessed the plaintiff from the suit land on 01.09.1967 and, therefore, the suit was filed.

6. The defendant No.1 to 3 filed contesting