Nishitendu Chaudhury, J.

1. This appeal understandably under Section 299 of the Indian Succession Act, 1925, is directed against the judgment and order dated 24.01.2007 passed by the learned District Judge, Tinsukia, in Misc. Succession Case No. 90 of 2005. Present appellant as petitioner instituted Misc. Succession Case No. 90 of 2005 on 31.03.2003 claiming that her deceased husband Abdul Mazid has expired on 10.11.2002 at Central Hospital, N.E. Coal Field, Margherita. He was a permanent resident of Makrani Line (Road Gaon) at Ledo in the same district. He was a permanent employee of North Eastern Coal filed and was posted at Ledo Colliery. At the time of his death he left behind the petitioner and a daughter Hasina Bagum aged about 23 years. He did not execute any will during his life time and so she is the legal heir with regard to the property left behind by the deceased. She prayed that a succession certificate be issued with respect to the debts and securities amounting to Rs. 1,66,640/, described in annexures to the petition.

2. One Abdul Khaleque filed objection against the succession certificate petition and denied not only the date and place of death of Abdul Mazid but also said that the petitioner was the widow of late Abdul Gaffar and not of Abdul Mazid. He stated that Abdul Mazid at the time of his death left behind his five legal heirs. In Paragraph-13 of the objection he further stated that Abdul Gaffar was son of late Saleh Mohammad and the persons mentioned in Paragraph-8 of the written statement are children of the petitioner Noor Nahar Begum and Abdul Gaffar. He stated that Abdul Gaffar and Abdul Mazid were related to each other. Abdul Gaffor died on 04.12.1996 and there was a Succession Certificate proceeding thereafter. He denied that Hasina Begum was daughter of Abdul Mazid.

3. The parties led evidence. Petitioner Noor Nahar Begum examined herself as sole P.W. 1 and exhibited kabinnama as Exhibit-1, certificate of Masjid Committee as Exhibit-2 and death certificate of Abdul Mazid as Exhibit-3. In course of her deposition she admitted that she was originally a wife of Abdul Gaffar and after death of her husband Abdul Gaffar she was remarried to Abdul Mazid on 10.02.2000.

4. Per contra, objector examined two witnesses. D.W. 1 Abdul Khaleque, son of Abdul Gafar and D.W.2, one Mujamil Ali. Abdul Khaleque stated in his examination-in-chief that Abdul Mazid was the son of Dil Mohammad and this Dil Mohammad and his father Abdul Gafar were sons of Saleh Mohammad. First wife of Abdul Gaffar was Raina Begum and DW1 is one of the sons of Abdul Gaffar and Raina Begum. After death of Raina Begum, Abdul Gafffar married present petitioner Noor Nahar Begum and Hasina Begum was born out of the said wedlock. This evidence of Abdul Khaleque was corroborated by D.W.2 Mujamil Ali. After considering these materials, learned trial court arrived at a finding of fact that Abdul Mazid was nephew of Abdul Gaffar and consequently Noor Nahar Begum was aunt of Abdul Mazid. This being the position, there was no question of marriage between the Abdul Mazid and Noor Nohar Begum because of the provisions of Mohammedan law. Having so found, the learned court held that the petitioner Noor Nahar Begum was not legally married wife of Abdul Mazid and so, she was not entitled to any Succession Certificate as prayed for. This judgment delivered on 24.01.2007 has been brought under challenge in the present appeal.

5. I have heard Dr. B. Ahmed, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. P.K. Bora, learned counsel for the respondent. I have perused the pleadings, depositions and exhibits adduced by the parties.

6. The objector appears to be the step son of the petitioner. Objector D.W. 1 is the son of Abdul Gaffar and petitioner Noor Nahar Begum is widow of Abdul Gafar. She was married to Abdul Gaffar after objector's mother Raina Begum had died. Thus, Noor Nahar Begum is none other than the step mother of Abdul Khaleque (D.W. 1). Abdul Mazid, on