Present : Shaw J.

ROSALINAHAMY v. SUWARIS.

375-P. C. Panadure, 69,795.

Evidence Ordinance, s. 112-Child born within three months of marriage- Is marriage conclusive proof that husband was the father ?- Physical impossibility of access.

The appellant married A, who was not known to her till marriage. A child was born within three months of marriage. The appellant alleging that respondent S was the father of the child claimed maintenance.

Held that section 112 of the Evidence Ordinance did not stand in the way of appellant's claim, and that the fact of marriage was not conclusive proof that A was the father.

Obiter.-Section 112, on the face of it, appears to apply to actions in which legitimacy comes into question, and it does not, on the face of it, appear to have any application to proceedings under the Maintenance Ordinance.

THE facts appear from the judgment.

Wijemanne, for the appellant.

J. S. Jayawardene, for the respondent.

May 3,1921. SHAW J.-

This is a somewhat peculiar case under the Maintenance Ordinance. The appellant took proceedings against the respondent to obtain an order for the maintenance of a child, which she sa