Long Cohabitation Between Man & Woman Raises Strong Presumption In Favour Of Their Marriage: Supreme Court

Read Judgment:

The Supreme Court reiterated that long cohabitation between a man and woman raises a strong presumption in favour of their marriage.

Case detail:

The presumption is rebuttable, a heavy burden lies on him who seeks to deprive the relationship of legal origin to prove that no marriage took place, the bench comprising Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and Vikram Nath observed.

In this case, the plaintiffs who filed a partition suit contended that the suit property belonged to one Kattukandi Edathil Kanaran Vaidyar who had four sons viz. Damodaran, Achuthan, Sekharan and Narayanan. The first plaintiff is the son of Damodaran, born in wedlock with one Chiruthakutty, and the second plaintiff is the son of the first plaintiff. The defendants contended that all the children except Achuthan died as bachelors and Karunakaran is the only son of Achuthan. They denied the contention of the plaintiffs that Damodaran had married Chiruthakutty and that the first plaintiff was the son born to them in the said wedlock. The Trial Court found that Damodaran had a long co­habitation with Chiruthakutty and thus it could be concluded that Damodaran had married Chiruthakutty and that the first plaintiff was the son born in the said wedlock. The Trial Court passed a preliminary decree for partition of the suit property into two shares and one such share was allotted to the plaintiffs. Allowing the appeal filed by the defendants, the High Court held that there is no evidence to establish the long cohabitation between the father and the mother of the first plaintiff and the documents only proved that the first plaintiff is the son of Damodaran, but not a legitimate son.

The appellant plaintiffs before the Apex Court contended that voluminous documents produced by them would show that Damodaran was the father of the first plaintiff and Chiruthakutty was the wife of Damodaran. The defendants, on the other hand, contended that there is no proof whatsoever either of the marriage or of the long cohabitation. The issue therefore considered by the Apex Court was whether there is sufficient evidence to prove the long cohabitation to establish the relationship of husband ­wife between Damodaran and Chiruthakutty?

There would be a presumption in favour of wedlock

The court, on examining the documents and evidence on record, observed that the plaintiffs have proved a long duration of cohabitation between Damodaran and Chiruthakutty as husband and wife. Further, the defendants have failed to rebut the presumption in favour of a marriage between Damodaran and Chiruthakutty on account of their long co­habitation, the court noted.

while allowing the appeal observed:

It is well settled that if a man and a woman live together for long years as husband and wife, there would be a presumption in favour of wedlock. Such a presumption could be drawn under Section 114 of the Evidence Act. Although the presumption is rebuttable, a heavy burden lies on him who seeks to deprive the relationship of legal origin to prove that no marriage took place.