SANJAY KAROL, PRASHANT KUMAR MISHRA
Chowdamma (D) by LRs. – Appellant
Versus
Venkatappa (D) by LRs. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to high court order (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of property and family relations (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. contentions by parties regarding marriage (Para 9 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. evidence evaluation on marital status (Para 10 , 19 , 20 , 25) |
| 5. presumption of marriage from cohabitation (Para 34 , 40 , 42) |
| 6. conclusion on appeal dismissal (Para 60 , 61) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This Appeal calls in question the impugned order dated 28.10.2010 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Regular First Appeal No. 935 of 2005, whereby the High Court allowed the said appeal filed by the plaintiffs and set aside the judgment of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) Holalkere, dated 24.03.2005 in O.S No. 102/2001, consequently decreed the suit for partition filed by the plaintiffs.
The genealogical chart germane to the present dispute is as under:
3. The case of the plaintiffs is that their grandfather, namely Thimmabovi Vellappa, had two sons: Dasabovi @ Dasappa and Venkatappa. Dasabovi had two wives. The first wife, Bheemakka @ Sathyakka, is the mother of the plaintiffs. The second wife, Chowdamma, is defendant No. 1 and their son is defendant No. 2. Dasabovi
Dolgobinda Paricha vs. Nimai Charan Misra and Others
State of Bihar vs. Radha Krishna Singh and Others
Badri Prasad vs. Dy. Director of Consolidation and Others
Andrahennedige Dinohamy and Another vs. Wijetunge Liyanapatabendige Balahamy and Others
Mohabbat Ali Khan vs. Mahomed Ibrahim Khan and Others
Addagada Raghavamma and Another vs. Addagada Chenchamma and Another
(1) Prolonged cohabitation attracts strong presumption in favour of a valid wedlock.(2) Revenue records carry only hold presumptive value and do not confer title.
The court affirmed that documentary evidence is paramount in establishing familial relationships over contradictory oral testimony in inheritance disputes.
A presumption of marriage exists based on cohabitation unless disproven, placing the burden of proof on the party denying the marriage status.
The presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act affirms a child's right to inherit, unless proven otherwise, promoting equality among heirs.
In partition suits, the burden of proof lies on the plaintiffs to establish their relationship to the deceased and the nature of the properties as joint family assets.
The evidence concerning family relationships must comply with Section 50 of the Indian Evidence Act, emphasizing special knowledge and admissibility.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of marriage and recognition of relationships based on long cohabitation, and the burden of proof on the party seeking to deny the v....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.