AIR 1994 SUPREME COURT 133 ::1993 AIR SCW 3765 ::(1994) MarriLJ 14 ::(1994) RevDec 47 ::1993 (2) UJ (SC) 708 ::1993 (52) DLT 236 ::(1993) 2 HinduLR 517 ::1994 (1) CivilCourtC 53 ::(1994) 1 CivilCourtC 535 ::1994 (1) SCC 460 ::1994 (1) All CJ 430 ::1994 (1) CurCC 78 ::1993 (3) AllCriLR 395 ::1994 (1) APLJ 22 ::1994 (1) AndhLT 33 ::1994 (1) DMC 484 ::(1993) MatLR 364 ::(1993) 6 JT 495 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

(From : Madras)

Hon'ble Judge(s): S. Ratnavel Pandian, R. M. Sahai , JJ

Evidence Act (1 of 1872) , S.114— Presumption of valid marriage - Rebuttable - Prolonged living together of man and woman as husband and wife - Presumption of valid marriage between them arises - Omission to mention name of concubine (wife) and her sons in will executed by father of husband - And also absence of their reference in compromise entered into between husband and his brothers - Does not destroy the presumption of legality of marriage. Decision of Madras High Court, Reversed.Will - Partition - Presumption of husband and wife.Marriage - Legality - Presumption of.Husband and wife - Rebuttable. If a man and woman live together for long years as husband and wife then a presumption arises in law of legality of marriage existing between the two. But the presumption is rebuttable. Mere omission to mention the name of a woman who was living as a concubine and her offspring in the will executed by the father-in-law cannot destroy the presumption which otherwise arises in law. In the Hindu society no father would, normally, tolerate behaviour of his son of having a concubine, therefore, the mere fact that father of husband while executing the will did not mention the name of concubine or her offspring is of no consequence. Similarly the absence of any reference to concubine and her children in the compromise entered between husband and his bro....