JUDGMENT Gurusharan Sharma, J. 1. Shreeram Gorain of village Satanpur, district Dhanbad left behind two sons, Him Gorain and Janki Gorain. Hiru Gorain had two sons, Agnu Gorain and Chhutu Gorain. Janki Gorain had a son Nadu gorain, who died leaving behind his widow, Sumia Dasi and two sons Sukar Gorain and Bhagtu Gorain, defendants 3 to 5. Agnu Gorain died leaving behind two sons, Shankar Gorain and Makhan Gorain, plaintiffs and Chhutu died leaving behind two sons Laxman Gorain and Ledu Gorain, defendants 1 and 2. 2. By registered patta dated 12.2.1915, Ext. 2, tenure- holder, Nilman Singha settled plot Nos. 959 to 963 with Hiru Gorain, Janki Gorain and Agnu Gorain. 3. According to plaintiffs, three settlees in exercise of their right of Korkar re-claimed adjacent lands of plot Nos. 956 and 964 on both sides and amalgamated with plot Nos. 959 to 963. The total area of 7 acres thereof was described in Schedule A to the plaint. The plaintiffs claimed half share therein and 1/3rd share of Agnu Gorain and after death of Hiru Gorain half of his share, i.e. 1/6th. 4. Plaintiffs further case was that Schedule B lands wave taken in raiyati settlement by Agnu Gorain, Chhutu Gorain and Sukar Gorain, defendant No. 4 in equal share and registered deed of Kabuliat dated 6.4.1944, Ext. B was executed therefor. Plaintiffs claimed 1/3rd share therein. 5. Defendants 1 and 2 contested the suit and denied any raiyati settlement of Schedule A lands with Agnu Gorain. According to them, Hiru Gorain and Janki gorain had obtained settlement thereof respectively to the extent of 2/3rd and 1/3rd and both of them came and continued in possession thereof. Accordingly Schedule A lands were recorded in Survey Record of Rights in their names having shares as aforesaid and Agnus name was not recorded therefor. 6. After death of Hiru Gorain, there was amicable partition among Agnu Gorain, Chhutu Gorain, Sukar Gorain and Bhagtu Gorain and subsequently, a memorandum of partition was prepared on 8th Jaistha, 1355 Fasli over which Agnu had also put his LTI along with others. In the said partition, Agnu was allotted only 1/3rd share in those lands obtained by way of raiyati settlement in the year 1915. 7. In the said partition, Agnu was allotted only 1/3rd share in those lands obtained by way of raiyati settlement in the year 1915. 7. In the aforesaid circumstance, both the courts below recorded concurrent findings of fact that although name of Agnu Gorain was shown in Ext, 2 as one of the settlees to the extent of 1/3rd share, but, in fact he never exercised his independent right thereon. Since 2/3rd amount of salami was paid by Hiru Gorain, he got 2/3rd share and rest 1/3rd share belonged to Janki Gorain. Hence, after death of Hiru Gorain, his two sons, Agnu Gorain. father of plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2, and Chhutu Gorain, father of defendants 1 and 2 inherited half and half share in Schedule A. lands. 8. Defendants 1 and 2 succeeded in establishing, that only Hiru Gorain and Janki Gorain had obtained settlement of Schedule A lands through Ext. 2 to the extent of 2/3rd and l/3rd share and had paid amount of Salami accordingly. Although name of Agnu, elder son of Hiru Gorain was also mentioned in Ext. 2, but he did not acquire any interest in Schedule A lands during life time of his father, Hiru. 9. Agnu had no independent source of income during life time of his father and he was fully dependent on his father and was living jointly with him and his brother, Chhutu. Agnus name was, therefore, rightly not recorded in survey records in respect thereof and on death of Hiru his two sons Agnu and Chhutu inherited 2/3rd share left by him to the extent of half and half. 10. Plaintiffs, being sons of Agnu, were entitled to 1/3rd share and defendants 1 and 2, being heirs of Chhutu inherited 1/3rd share in the property left by their father. 11. This Second Appeal is concluded by concurrent findings of fact recorded by both the courts below. 12. There is no merit in this appeal. It is, accordingly, dismissed, but without costs. Let lower Court records be sent down.