Abdur Rahman, J.

1. Whether Madurai Naicken was the legitimate son of Narayanaswami Mudali is the only question that falls to be determined in this appeal. Both Narayanaswami and Vanajakshi were members of the Naick community and were alleged by the plaintiff to have been married. The marriage was found to have been established by the trial Court and from the manner in which the judgment of the lower appellate Court proceeds, it may be assumed that this finding was affirmed. In spite of this, however, their conclusions on the question of Madurais legitimacy were conflicting. The District Munsifs finding is in para. 20 of his judgment. It is in the following words:

I am of opinion that there is no evidence worth the name, or even any attempt to prove non-access as between the married husband and wife.

2. The District Judge on the other hand, found that the presumption raised by Section 112, Evidence Act, had been effectively rebutted. This inference was drawn from certain circumstances which will have to be considered by me in due course. But before I do so, let me see, as contended for by learned counsel for the respondent, if the allegation of fact to the effect that in the e