1. By this appeal filed under Section 100 of the C.P.C., the judgment and decree dated 30.09.2008 delivered in Title Appeal No. 12 of 2008 by the Additional District Judge, North Tripura, Kailashahar has been challenged.

2. At the time of admitting this appeal, this Court formulated the following substantial questions of law:

(1) Whether the learned first appellate court committed error, in the eye of law, by holding that in view of the provisions prescribed by the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the second wife of the deceased Surendra Debnath was entitled to inherit the properties belonging to late Surendra Debnath.

(2) Whether the learned first appellate court committed error by holding that the said deed executed by the second wife of late Surendra Debnath was valid in the eye of law?

3. Mr. S. Deb, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant at the outset has candidly submitted that he would not press the substantial question No. 1. He would address the substantial question No. 2 as according to him, there lies the real controversy.

4. For purpose of appreciating the substantial question of law as indicated, a very brief prospectus of the