THE STATE OF MEGHALAYA AND ORS. Vs. BIMOL DEB AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The brief fact of the case in a nutshell is that:

(2.) Mr. K. S. Kynjing, learned Advocate General appearing for and on behalf of the petitioner submitted that, as per the Meghalaya Transfer of Land (Regulation) Amendment Act, 2010 (Act No. 11 of 2012) no one can make a Will to transfer the property from one living person to another living person. He also submitted that, the present Will in question is not a Will at all, but it was made for the purpose of transfer of land by the testator of the Will. The learned Advocate General also raised a question that, the matter is barred by limitation because Shri Indrajit Dutta the Executor of the said Will did not take any step to obtain the probate during his lifetime. It is almost after 18(eighteen) years of the death of the testator, the probate was obtained by the respondent No. 1 (Shri Bimol Deb) and prayed that the impugned order passed by the Meghalaya Board of Revenue vide order dated 20.01.2010 is bad in law and needs to be quashed. Mr. K.S. Kyning, learned Advocate General in support to his submission relied on:

(3.) On the other hand, Mr. A. Khan, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of the respondents relied on Paras 14, 15, 16, 18 and 19 of the counter affidavit. He also referred to section 6 of the Meghalaya Interpretation and General Clauses Act, 1972 and to support his submission relied on: