“It is not a case that parties lived together for several years in the same house and children were born out of their wedlock. There is no evidence on record that the husband, recognise, his wife and children by affectionate provisions,” the Court held.
Therefore, when the marriage itself has not been proved, the legitimacy and presumption for it cannot be drawn, the judgment stated.
The Bench noted that the priest who performed the marriage was not examined as a witness in the case.
It was further brought to light that the wife relied upon a document of the hospital and also the birth certificate that reflected the name of the husband as her daughter’s father, proving paternity.
“The daughter though is in hold of acknowledgment of his paternity which normally in turn attaches legitimacy of marriage but in order to establish the legitimacy of child, the marriage was required to be proved,” the Bench stated.
The High Court upheld the orders of the family court and directed the husband to give his daughter a legitimate share in his property, since he had not challenged paternity.
Source: Barandbench
