land covered by Khata No. 99? (vi) Whether Sami Ullah and Badlu i.e. the respondents were entitled to 11/12 share in respect of plot Nos. 31, 94, 95, 96, 97 and 99 etc. as claimed? (vii) Whether plot Nos. 35, 57, 111 and 112 were the sole sirdari of the respondents as claimed?8 (viii) What were the share of the parties qua Khata No. 99? (ix) Whether Zahoor was co-tenant of plot No. 115 of Khata No. 100 as claimed? (x) Whether the respondents were the sole owner of the land of Khata No. 100? (xi) What were the shares of the parties qua Khata No. 100? 11.5. After noting that it was an admitted position that neither the daughter in the family nor their sons got any share in the lands belonging to the family, Consolidation Officer observed that the appellants and the respondents were recorded as co- tenant of the land in Khata No. 98. Respondents also admitted the share of the appellants in plot Nos. 94, 95, 96, 99, 100 etc. to the extent of 1/12. Thus, according to the Consolidation