Back
AJOY KUMAR MUKHERJEE
Sitaram Khan – Appellant
Versus
Prabir Khan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Ajoy Kumar Mukherjee, J.
1. This application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been directed against order no. 80 dated 28th March 2019 passed by learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), 1st Court, Chinsurah. Petitioner herein as plaintiff filed suit for partition being Title Suit No. 208 of 2008 inter alia praying for a declaration that plaintiff and defendant Smt. Puspa Rani Khan, who is the wife of the brother of plaintiff Late Dibakar Khan, has 8 anas share each in the suit property. In the said suit defendant did not contest the suit. Said suit was decreed ex-parte on 28th May 2010. Thereafter, Sri Prabir Kumar Khan, the opposite party no 2 herein, claiming himself as son of defendant Puspa Rani filed an application under Order I Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure for adding him as a party and also for setting aside ex-parte decree. Plaintiff-petitioner filed written objection against the said applications, but learned Trial Court by an order dated 2nd February 2013 allowed the application for setting aside ex-parte decree and also added Sri Prabir Khan as defendant no.2 in the suit.
2. In the month of February 2013, defendant no 1 i.e. aforesaid Pus
The court upheld the denial of a DNA test for paternity, emphasizing the need for a strong prima facie case and the protection of privacy rights.
DNA Test – It is not always necessary to conduct DNA test to ascertain whether a particular child was born to a particular person – It is burden of person who alleges or disputes paternity that he ha....
In paternity disputes, the court emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the one denying parentage, and DNA testing can be authorized to ascertain biological relationships.
In paternity disputes, the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act prevails unless strong evidence of non-access is established, balancing privacy rights against the ne....
DNA testing can be crucial for establishing maternity when denied, balancing evidentiary needs against privacy rights.
Paternity/Maternity of child – A person cannot be forced to undergo Paternity or Maternity test, but direction can be issued to a person to undergo DNA test.
(1) Legitimacy of child – DNA test is not to be directed as a matter of routine but only in deserving cases – Indian law leans towards legitimacy and frowns upon bastardy – Presumption in law of legi....
A party cannot be compelled to undergo a DNA test without a strong prima facie case established by the requesting party, emphasizing the burden of proof and privacy rights.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
