Presumption of legitimacy and testamentary power over ancestral property affirmed despite challenge to parentage and limitation

Presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act was held unrebutted because the evidence did not prove non-access between the spouses; mere allegations of adultery or immoral conduct were insufficient, so the plaintiff's status as the deceased's son stood. A school leaving certificate was treated as admissible corroborative evidence of parentage and did not weaken the statutory presumption. The text also states that a male Hindu may validly bequeath ancestral or coparcenary property under Section 30 read with Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, and that the suit challenging the mutation and will was barred by limitation.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was rebutted so as to dislodge the plaintiffs status as son of the deceased. (ii) Whether the school leaving certificate could be relied upon as admissible evidence of parentage. (iii) Whether the deceased could validly execute a will in respect of ancestral property and whether the suit was barred by limitation.

Issue (i): Whether the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was rebutted so as to dislodge the plaintiffs status as son of the deceased.

Analysis: Section 112 creates a conclusive presumption of legitimacy where a child is born during the continuance of a valid marriage, and that presumption can be displaced only by clear and satisfactory proof of non-access. Mere allegations of adulterous conduct or immoral living do not suffice. In the present case, the evidence did not establish non-access between the spouses, and the birth of the plaintiff during the subsistence of the marriage attracted the statutory presumption.

Conclusion: The presumption under Section 112 was not rebutted, and the plaintiff was rightly treated as the son of the deceased.

Issue (ii): Whether the school leaving certificate could be relied upon as admissible evidence of parentage.

Analysis: A school leaving certificate is a public document within the evidentiary framework and, once admitted without timely objection to mode of proof, cannot be excluded on that ground in appeal. In any event, the document was only corroborative, and the decisive basis remained the unrebutted presumption under Section 112.

Conclusion: The certificate was admissible and did not assist the respondents in rebutting the statutory presumption.

Issue (iii): Whether the deceased could validly execute a will in respect of ancestral property and whether the suit was barred by limitation.

Analysis: The property was ancestral, but Section 30 read with Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 permits testamentary disposition by a male Hindu even in respect of coparcenary or ancestral property. The concurrent finding that the will was duly executed could not be disturbed. On limitation, the plaint disclosed no satisfactory pleading or proof of the date of knowledge of the mutation or the will, and the suit was ex facie beyond time.

Conclusion: The will was legally effective, and the suit was time-barred.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the mutation and will failed, the findings supporting legitimacy and testamentary validity were affirmed, and the suit did not survive on merits or limitation.

Ratio Decidendi: The statutory presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 can be displaced only by clear proof of non-access, and a male Hindu may validly bequeath ancestral or coparcenary property under Section 30 read with Section 4 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

---