RAKESH SHARMA, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Vinod Kumar Shukla learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.R. Khan who has put in appearance on behalf of the respon­dents 2 to 13.
(2.) UNDER challenge is an order passed by the D.D.C, Faizabad dated 28.2.81 by which the concurrent finding recorded by the Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer, Consolidation regarding co-tenancy of the parties have been re­versed. The contesting parties were co-tenure holders and sirdars in Khata No. 109 having an area of 9 Bighas out of 18 Bighas in village Naseerpur, District Faizabad. The disputed Khata No. 109 was recorded in the basic year in the name of petitioners and the contesting respondents were shown in Class II category in jevenue en­tries. On commencement of consolida­tion proceeding, one of the respondent Smt. Dhiraji, filed objection before the C.O. claiming her share in the several Khatas as co-tenant. The respondents Raghunath and others filed objections that the entry of pe­titioners name in Khata No. 109 and the basic year was fictitious and it should be expunged. The petitioners throughout claimed a right of co-tenancy and well de­fined share on the basis of land being an­cestral and according to them they belong to same family.
(3.) THE Consolidation Officer and Settlement Officer, Consolidation accepted a pedigree in which Jokhan, Ramdihal, Buddhu and Khusi were shown as four sons of Sadhai. The other heirs in the land of succession were shown in the said pedi­gree. The Khatauni entries of 1301F, 1340F, 1346F, 1356F, 1359F were placed before the Court. Family settlement of 3 February, 1944 and 3 February, 1970 khewat, Gosh-wara etc. were also placed before the said Court. Both the Courts i.e. C.O and S.O.C had relied upon the pedigree placed before them. These Courts have concurrently up­held the basic year entry in favour of the petitioners, with his possession and their shares were kept intact. Detailed findings were recorded by the S.O.C while dealing with the appeal.;