The main legal point established in the judgment is that the issuance of heir-ship certificate does not confer any right of inheritance, and inheritance is determined by the applicable law at the time of the owner's death.

A.B. Pal, J.

1. The judgment and order dated 28.2.2006 passed by the District Council Court, Aizawl in CA. No. 12 of 1997 is under challenge in the present second appeal and the cross-objection preferred by the rival parties which I propose to dispose of by this common judgment. It may be noted at the very outset that this second appeal is under Order 3 of the Assam High Court (Jurisdiction over District Council Court), 1954, though the cross-objection has been raised under Order 41, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure. For the above reasons no substantial question of law have been formulated in the memo of appeal.

2. The dispute over the immovable properties covered by LSC No. AZL 56 of 1972 is between the contending parties herein who claim inheritance on the strength of being in the line of succession from the original owner P.S. Dahrawka who died on 5.3.1978. Admittedly the Mizo Customary Laws on inheritance has to be pressed into service to decide the issues by correct construction of the same. There is no dispute that the provision contained in Section 109 of the Mizo Customary Laws promulgated by the Mizo district council regulates the question of inheritance to properties of a Mizo dying in-testate. Before adverting to the question relating to the law of inheritance in terms of the Mizo customary law the factual matrix is to be noticed first.

3. P.S. Dahrawka and Kaithuami got married on 28.1.1927. They are no more. Ten children were born from their wedlock, two sons, eight daughters. Out often children one son died at the age of one and half year in 1940 and one daughter died a week after her birth. P.S. Dahrawka got the property in dispute only in 1972 by virtue of LSC No. AZL 56 of 1972. When he died on 5.3.1978 he was survived by his wife Kaithuami, only son Thanhnuna and seven daughters. All the daughters got married and have been living with their own families. The youngest daughter Thansangi, however, got divorced and came to live with her mother from January 1997. The only son Thanhnuna died in 1996 survived by his widow Smt. Ralliani and two daughters Smt. Laldinpuii and Km Lalmuanpuii who are Appellants herein. Admittedly, till his death in 1996 he lived with his mother, wife and daughters together in common mess. The mother Kaithuami died in 1999.

4. Thanhnuna, the only surviving son of Rs. Dahrawka and Kaithuami, applied for heir-ship certificate in his name in respect of the properties of LSC No. AZL 56 of 1972 left by his father. His claim was based on the Mizo customary law of inheritance which provides that son shall inherit the properties of a Mizo and if the deceased is survived by more than one son, the youngest son shall inherit. Thanhnuna being the only son claimed exclusive heir-ship over the said property. The application was registered in the court of sub district council, Aizawl as H.C. 1031 of 1996. But before the said application could be disposed of Thanhnuna died on 28.4.1996. Only after his death his mother kaithuami submitted an objection on 31.5.1996. However, the sub-district council court dismissed the application of Thanhnuna for heirship certificate on 11.6.1996 due to death of the applicant. Immediately thereafter, in the same month, the widow of Thanhnuna presented an application for restoration of the H.C. Case No. 1031 of 1996 instituted by her husband. On 3.7.1996 the application was dismissed. The widow, however, was informed that her mother-in-law had submitted a counter claim to issue heir-ship certificate in her name and, therefore, she was at liberty to submit an objection or counter claim in that proceeding.

5. The application of Kaithuami claiming heir-ship certificate in respect of the properties in suit of her husband was initially registered as H.C No. 1275 of 1996. But after receipt of objection from Smt. Ralliani and her two daughters the case was converted into civil suit No. 13 of 1996 in the court of Subordinate District Council Court, Aizawl. The said case