The judgment established that an illegitimate son is not entitled to inherit ancestral coparcenary property but can claim inheritance in the property of his parents. The deletion of ancestors' names from the record of rights does not accrue any title to the plaintiff if he is not in possession of the land.

JUDGMENT :

Heard the parties.

2. No one turns up on behalf of the respondents in-spite of repeated calls. Hence, this appeal is heard ex-parte.

3. This second appeal has been preferred under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure against the judgment and decree dated 10.01.2011 passed by the learned District Judge, Gumla in Title Appeal No. 13 of 2009 whereby and where under, by the said judgment of concurrence, the learned first appellate court has dismissed the appeal and confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the learned trial court being the court of Munsif, Gumla in Title Suit No.41 of 2002 dated 31.03.2009 by which the learned trial court dismissed the suit of the plaintiff on contest filed with a prayer for declaration of right, title and interest of the plaintiff over the suit land and for recovery of the possession of the suit land.

4. The case of the plaintiff in brief is that the record of right of the suit land is in the name of Anant Kumhar- the grandfather of the plaintiff as Kaimi. Anant Kumhar died leaving behind his only son Indru Kumhar who is the father of the plaintiff. Indru Kumhar died just after abolition of zamindari when the plaintiff was minor. In the meantime, Government of Bihar without notification and without paying compensation acquired the suit land and constructed a residential quarter over approximately 0.08 acres. The plaintiff knew about the land and applied for mutation of his name showing himself to be the heirs of the recorded tenant but the record of right of the mutation case filed by the plaintiff became unavailable after 06.07.2000 during the pendency of the mutation case in the Circle Office, Palkot. The concerned officers of the Circle Office, Palkot refused to trace out the record. The plaintiff asserted that Government without any right, title, interest and possession over the area of 1 acre was trying to capture the land of the plaintiff. The plaintiff sent a notice under Section 80 of Code of Civil Procedure. It is further the case of the plaintiff that after the death of Indru Kumhar- the father of the plaintiff, the plaintiff applied for mutation of his name by showing of succession and the mutation was allowed in Mutation Case No.62/85-86 only in respect of an area of 2.89 acres instead of total area of khata no.673 being 3.97 acres. The plaintiff thereafter was advised by the Circle Officer to file a separate mutation case in respect of the remaining 1.08 acres of land, the case record of which remains traceless during the pendency of the case. Hence, the plaintiff filed the suit.

5. In their written statement, the defendants challenged the maintainability of the suit on various technical grounds and admitted that khata no.673 of revenue village Palkot, plot no.1656 measuring an area of 1.08 acres was recorded in 1932 survey in the name of Anant Kumhar, son of Sita Ram Kumhar but it denied that Rajendra Kumhar is the successor of Indru Kumhar. Genealogy table has been furnished by the defendants and from the genealogy table, it appears that Anant Kumhar had three sons being Meghnath Kumhar, Indru Kumhar and Chandra Kumhar. Chandra Kumhar was married but he died issueless and Meghnath Kumhar also died issueless. Indru Kumhar had only one daughter namely Lalo Devi. After death of Meghnath Kumhar, the widow of Meghnath Kumhar was kept as concubine by his younger brother Indru Kumhar and thus Rajendra Kumhar is not the legal son of Indru Kumhar and Rajendra Kumhar has no right, title and interest in this case and the suit is not maintainable. The defendants further pleaded that the suit land was duly acquired by the Government of Bihar after abolition of zamindari in 1955-56 and for this, Indru Kumhar son of Anant Kumhar was paid Rs.700/- only as compensation for the said land. The residential quarter of circle officer is situated over 15 decimals of the acquired land and the remaining 93 decimals of plot no.1656 is also in peaceful possession of the Government of Jharkhand sinc