<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2010 (8) TMI 1168 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306020</link>
    <description>Official records such as school registers, voter lists and certificates did not dislodge concurrent findings on the deceased&#039;s relationship with Smt. Shakuntala or the respondents&#039; heirship, because admissibility is distinct from probative value and the documents were internally inconsistent. The Court also reaffirmed that long and continuous cohabitation of a man and woman as husband and wife raises a presumption of marriage and legitimacy of children, rebuttable only by unimpeachable evidence. On the facts, the appellants&#039; material was unreliable and contradictory, so the presumption remained unrebutted and the respondents&#039; claim stood.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2023 16:35:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=700770" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 1168 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306020</link>
      <description>Official records such as school registers, voter lists and certificates did not dislodge concurrent findings on the deceased&#039;s relationship with Smt. Shakuntala or the respondents&#039; heirship, because admissibility is distinct from probative value and the documents were internally inconsistent. The Court also reaffirmed that long and continuous cohabitation of a man and woman as husband and wife raises a presumption of marriage and legitimacy of children, rebuttable only by unimpeachable evidence. On the facts, the appellants&#039; material was unreliable and contradictory, so the presumption remained unrebutted and the respondents&#039; claim stood.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306020</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>