JUDGMENT :

[Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.]

1. Heard.

2. This second appeal has been filed being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and decree dated 03.10.2013 (decree sealed and signed on 18.11.2013) passed by the learned District Judge No. II, Palamau at Daltonganj in Title Appeal No. 03 of 1997 affirming the judgment and decree dated 19.12.1996 (decree sealed and signed on 10.01.1997) passed by the learned 2nd Additional Munsif, Daltonganj in Title Suit No. 53 of 1992.

3. Title Suit No. 53 of 1992 was instituted by the appellants/plaintiff for declaration of plaintiff's valid title and possession over the suit properties by virtue of registered deed of Baimokasa being deed no. 1175 dated 02.03.1987 executed by the proforma defendant no. 3 namely Sheikh Mohammad Rasul and for other relief which the plaintiff be entitled with cost of the suit. The learned trial court after appreciating the evidence, dismissed the said title suit. Aggrieved with that judgment, the appellants/plaintiff preferred Title Appeal No. 03 of 1997 which was dismissed by the learned District Judge-II, Palamau at Daltonganj vide judgment dated 03.10.2013 affirming the judgment passed by the learned trial court dated 19.12.1996. Aggrieved with that judgment, the present second appeal has been filed by the appellants/plaintiff.

4. The appellants/plaintiff instituted the said title suit alleging therein that the land being Khata No. 251, area 2.46 acre covered by plot Nos. 1916, 1990, 2001, 2003, 2017, 2035, 2029, 2109, 2119, 2163 and 2166 situated in village Haidarnagar, P.S. Haidarnagar, formerly P.S. Hussainabad Thana No. 303, District Palamau was recorded raiyati in the name of Sardar Jolha s/o Ali Mohammad Jolha of Village Haidarnagar during the last cadestral survey and settlement operation. It was further alleged that similarly the land bearing Khata No. 252 Plot No. 1910 (0.02), 2552 (0.48), 2592 (0.31) total area 81 decimal situated in village Haidarnagar were recorded in the name of Abdul Jolha, Neyaz Ali Jolha and Sardar Jolha having equal shares during the cadestral survey and settlement operation. In order to appreciate the relationship of parties to the suit the plaintiff has given Genealogical Table in the plaint and this suit relates only between the sons of Sardar Jolha, so in the Genealogical table only the heirs of Sardar Jolha has been given. This suit was also filed in respect of the properties of plaintiff which she got by virtue of registered Baimokasa deed executed by proforma defendant No. 3 in her favour relating to plot No. 2029 area 21 decimal of Khata No. 251 fully described in the Schedule-A of the plaint and which was subject matter of this suit. It was further alleged that the last cadestral survey recorded tenant Sardar Jolha died in about 35 years ago leaving behind him his three sons, namely, Rasul Mian, Chhakan Mian and Gani Mian, who became the owner of 1/3rd after inheritance and the aforesaid 3 sons of Sardar Jolha partitioned the land of Khata No. 251 in three parts equally by metes and bounds in or about the 35 years ago after the death of Sardar Jolha. The Proforma defendant No. 3 got exclusively the entire plot No. 2029 area 21 decimals and entire plot No. 2017 area 16 decimals and got 1/3rd share in remaining each of the plots of Khata No. 251 except entire plot No. 2109 area 44 decimals and 2163 area 29 decimals. These two plots were allotted in the share of the principal defendants exclusively besides 1/3rd share each of the principal defendant got in remaining plots of Khata No. 252 and accordingly the proforma defendant No. 3 and the principal defendants came in possession about 35 years ago as per final partition and accordingly acted upon and made construction of houses. The proforma defendant No. 3 constructed the residential house in the land of plot No. 2029 from the pocket of his own fund and Sk. Budhai Mian who is father-in-law of proforma defendant No. 3 and father of the plaintiff also spent amount in