(1.) So much of the pleadings as is necessary to be set out for the purpose of this appeal is given below,
(2.) Fourteen annas share of village Chand-goan appertaining to estate No. 107 of the Collectorate of Mymensingh belonged to one Bilashi Debya, and on her death devolved on her two sons Parbati Sankar and Kali Sankar in equal shares. In batwara proceedings between the two brothers, a part of the said village was allotted to Kali Sankar as Taluk No. 13164 and the part that was allotted to Parbati Sankar became Taluk No. 13165. The two brothers got possession of their respective sahams on 28 March 1907. So far the parties are not in dispute as to the facts.
(3.) The plaintiffs case is that Kali Sankar while in separate possession of Taluk No. 13164 died in Jaistha 1316 B. S. (May 1909) leaving his widow the plain" tiff 1, Jagatrani, and . a minor son and also a daughter; that shortly thereafter the minor son died leaving plaintiff 1 as his heir; that plaintiff 1 lived a long way off from Mymensingh, that is to say, at Fyzabad, and entrusted Parbati Sankar with the management of the taluk and was thus in possession. Shortly before the suit plaintiff 1 learnt that Parbati Sankar had, on the allegation that he had got the property by survivorship on Kali Sankar's death, got his name recorded under the Land Registration Act and also in the Record-of-Rights and transferred the estate to certain persons who for the sake of brevity may be called the Baisyas. On 3 September 1926 plaintiff 1 gave a miras taluk (permanent) lease to plaintiffs 2 to 6 in the name of plaintiff 2, the last mentioned five plaintiffs being brothers. On 7 September 1920 the six plaintiffs jointly instituted the present suit against Parbati Sankar as defendant 1 and the Baisyas as defendants 2 to 5. for declaration of the taluki right of plaintiff 1 and miras taluki right of plaintiffs 2 to 6 under plaintiff 1 and for confirmation of possession or in the alternative for recovery of possession and mesne profits.