ORDER : 1. We heard Mr. S.T. Desai, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. Shanti Bhushan, learned counsel for the respondents. Our conclusion is as under : 2. Award of the arbitrator dated April 2, 1901 is legal and valid and is binding on the parties to this appeal notwithstanding the fact that Smt. Jiwani, widow of Jawahar, son of Patram was not a party to it. It was acted upon and cannot be rejected on the ground that it was not acted upon. 3. Nagar, son of Patram who was the common ancestor of the parties to this appeal received ?rd share in the property allotted to Smt. Jiwani, widow of Jawahar, son of Patram after the death of Smt. Rain Kaur, her daugater in the award dated April 2, 1901, the other ?rd share having gone to Dulli and Diwan, both sons of Patram. 4. In the property that came to the share of Nagar on the death of Ram Kaur, Challoo had no interest or share in view of the award dated April 2, 1901. Other four sons of Nagar each had ¼th share in the property that came to the share of Nagar. Jagram, son of Nagar and Tirkha, son of Nagar both died without leaving a lineal discendant after the death of Ram Kaur. Therefore, Challoo as an heir of Jagram and Tirkha would have ?th share in that property which came to the share of Jagram and Tirkha, Sisram and Sher Singh each having ?th share over and above ¼th share which they acquired on the death of Nagar. To be precise Challoo would have ?th share in the property that came to the share of Nagar on the death of Rain Kaur and Sisram and Sher Singh will have 5/12th share. 5. It is declared that there was no partition in 1932 as contended by the respondents. 6. Some pieces of land bearing at present Nos. 10/1, 203/3, 227M, 317M, 331/1, 629/2, 636/11, 646, 728/I, 729/1, 740, 828/2 and 843M which did not form part of the arbitration award of April 2, 1901 and which appeared to have been brought under plough later on must be divided amongst persons who jointly put in labour to bring the uncultivated land under the plough. 10/1, 203/3, 227M, 317M, 331/1, 629/2, 636/11, 646, 728/I, 729/1, 740, 828/2 and 843M which did not form part of the arbitration award of April 2, 1901 and which appeared to have been brought under plough later on must be divided amongst persons who jointly put in labour to bring the uncultivated land under the plough. According to the statement of appellant No. 1, nine persons put in joint labour to claim the land included in the aforementioned plots. They are Khasa Ram, Bharat Singh, Maroo, Phool Singh, Jeet Singh, Kali Ram, Pheru, Chaman Singh and Hirdey Ram. Each one of then would have equal share in the land included in the aforementioned plots. 7. It is clarified that all that plots specified with numbers in the award dated April 2, 1901 may be identified with reference to the new Order dated March 6, 1984 in Civil Appeal No. 850 of 1971. numbers alloted to them and shall be taken over according to the allotment made in the award. If some one other than the allottee is in possession, the allottee will be entitled to claim possession under this decree. 8. This appeal is allowed and the decree is made in terms herein set out with no orders as to costs throughout.