JUDGMENT : PARTHIVJYOTI SAIKIA, J. 1. Heard Mr. T.H. Hazarika, learned counsel representing the appellants as well as Mr. B.C. Talukdar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. This is a Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) whereby the judgment dated 04.05.2019 and decree dated 10.05.2019 respectively passed by the court of learned Civil Judge, Lakhimpur, North Lakhimpur in Title Suit No.23/2016 is under challenge. 3. The only point for determination in this appeal is as to whether in the absence of any sons, the appellants being the only daughters of late Hasmi Iqbal Ahmed are entitled to inherit 1/9 th of his properties after his death or 2/3 rds of his properties. 4. The learned trial court relied upon Section 53 of the Mahomedan Law and held that the Sunni Mahomedan Law does not recognize any right of representation and sons’ daughter do not inherit as representing their respective father, but in their own right as granddaughters of the deceased. For this reason, the trial court held that the daughters of late Hasmi Iqbal Ahmed are to inherit 1/9 th shares of the properties left by their deceased father. 5. The learned counsel Mr. Hazarika, has relied upon Section 63 of the Mahomedan Law the table of shares of Section 63 shows that if there are two or more daughters, they are collectively entitled to 2/3 rd of the shares of the property left behind by their father. 6. Mr. Talukdar also dealt with Section 63 of the Mahomedan Law in a different manner, which this Court does not find necessary to highlight. 7. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel of both sides, this Court is of the opinion that the submissions made by Mr. Hazarika has force in it. According to the table of shares regarding Sunni Law annexed with Section 63 of the Mahomedan Law, as mentioned in Mulla’s Principles of Mahomedan Law, the appellants being the only daughters of late Hasmi Iqbal Ahmed, are entitled to 2/3 rd of the properties left behind by their deceased father. Therefore, the Issue Nos. 2 and 3 are decided accordingly in favour of the appellants. 8. So far as the Issue Nos.1 and 4 are concerned, there is a cause of action for the suit filed by the appellants and they are entitled to the relief as prayed for. Therefore, the Issue Nos. 2 and 3 are decided accordingly in favour of the appellants. 8. So far as the Issue Nos.1 and 4 are concerned, there is a cause of action for the suit filed by the appellants and they are entitled to the relief as prayed for. This Court is in agreement with the decision of the trial court. However, the appellants are entitled to collectively inherit 2/3 rd of the properties left behind by their father. 9. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is modified accordingly. The appellants are entitled to collectively inherit 2/3 rd of the properties left behind by their father. Prepare the Decree accordingly. Send back the LCR.