Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act: Presumption of Legitimacy Explained

2024 0 Supreme(MP) 644

(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 125 - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Section 112 - Maintenance - Family Court directed ... 112, requiring strong evidence to rebut - Petitioner failed to provide evidence to disprove paternity. ... 112 of the Evidence Act stands unless convincingly rebutted, and the petitioner did not meet this burden. ... Can Be Conducted To Rebut Presumption Under Section #HL_....

2024 0 Supreme(Mad) 914

CRIMINAL REVISION - MAINTENANCE AND PATERNITY DISPUTE - Indian Evidence Act, Section 112; Criminal Procedure ... Code, Section 397, 401 - The court discussed Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, which establishes a conclusive presumption ... The court upheld the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, stating that the petitioner failed to ... #HL_START....

2024 0 Supreme(All) 858

Sections 125, 126(2), 391; Evidence Act Section 112 - The court discussed the provisions of Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. regarding ... It emphasized the conclusive presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act, which states that a child born during ... Ratio Decidendi: The court reiterated that the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence ... The prov....

2023 0 Supreme(Pat) 657

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 12(1) (d) – r/w Section 112 of Evidence Act, 1872 – Annulment of marriage ... 112 of the Evidence Act also – this 280 days is upper limit of the gestation period and not the lower limit – the child may be born ... days of the wife joining the husband at his matrimonial home – general gestation period of child is 280 days which is enshrined in section ... Section #HL_STAR....

Current Civil Cases

(Paras 14 and 17) (B) Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 12(1)(d) – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 112 ... 112 of Evidence Act – Pregnancy test by ultrasound is not fully accurate – On the basis of such test one cannot claim on which date ... 112 of Evidence Act – Respondent-husband is not entitled to get his marriage with Appellant-wife declared void by decree of nullity ... Section 112#HL....

It is contended that the application has failed to rebut the legal presumption created by section 112 of the Evidence Ordinance. This section is worded as follows:- ? ... At p. 225 I observe that the learned Judge in referring to section 112 of the Evidence Ordinance stated that the section had been construed in Jane Nona v. Leo which was a decisi....

The words " no access to the mother " in section 112 of the Evidence Ordinance (No. 14 of 1895) mean impossibility of access. ... Under our law it is not merely a presumption of legitimacy which is to be rebutted, but what section 112 terms " conclusive proof of " legitimacy. ... -Section 112 of the Evidence Act speaks of conclusive proof of the le....

Although the Magistrate has found this state of facts to be true, he has dismissed the applicant's case, in consequence of what he thinks is the law under section 112 of the Evidence Ordinance. ... De Silva [1] the respondent's counsel admitted that he could not contend that under section 112 of the Ceylon Evidence Ordinance that it is necessary to prove absolute impossibility of ac....

2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 41532

to bring the application within the purview of provisions of Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act. ... Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with birth during continuance of the valid marriage and it being a conclusive proof of legitimacy of the child born thereunder. For reference Section 112 of the #HL_STA....

2023 Supreme(Online)(DEL) 8880

112 of Indian Evidence Act: The Ingredients ........................... 7 (ii) Intent Behind Section 112 of Indian Evidence Act ............................... 9 (iii) Whether DNA Test Can Be Conducted To Rebut Presumption Under Section 112 Of Indian Evidence Act ........................................

2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 742

Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy. Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is reproduced here under : "112. -The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to e....

2016 0 Supreme(Del) 3144

So far as a challenge to paternity is concerned, it is well settled that a rebuttable presumption lies under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 in favour of the paternity of the legitimacy of a child born during marriage. For expediency, we extract Section 112 which reads as follows:- “Section 112 in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 112. The presumption under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy—The ....

2015 0 Supreme(Bom) 2070

Birth during marriage, conclusive proof of legitimacy.--The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten." The Hon'ble Apex court in case of Kamti ....

2011 0 Supreme(P&H) 2066

Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court in Rohit Shekhar v. Narayan Dutt Tiwari, 2010(168) DLT 326 to contend that in a case where question of paternity had to be adjudicated, the court should not have rejected the prayer for DNA test in the manner it has been done. Further, reference was made to Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act also. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the trial court had erron....

2011 0 Supreme(P&H) 1932

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the trial court had erroneously dismissed the application as it was essential for the just decision of the case and paternity of defendant No.1 was required to be determined so that the defence taken by the defendants be falsified. Learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon a Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court in Rohit Shekhar v. Narayan Dutt Tiwari, 2010(168) DLT 326 to contend that in a case where question of paternity h....