Sunita Agarwal, J. - (1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant.
(2.) There is concurrent finding by the lower Court that the plaintiffs have not been able to establish that all the defendants were members of joint Hindu family. So far as agricultural land is concerned, it is admitted by PW-1 Amar Chandra/plaintiff no.3 that his name does find place in the revenue records and the land in question is recorded in the name of defendant no. 1 Yasoda Nandan. It is further recorded by the Court below that no proceedings whatsoever has been initiated by the plaintiffs before the revenue Court for the agricultural land namely plot no. 31.
(3.) For two houses (one residential house and a cattle house) it was recorded that plaintiff No. 3 had admitted that these were constructed after 1980 when his father was a teacher. The finding is that the disputed houses are self acquired property of defendant No.1. This finding on issue no.1 regarding claim of the plaintiffs has been affirmed by the first Appellate Court.;