Supreme Court upholds High Court decree recognising widowhood and grants partition on proof of marital relationship

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra heard the appeal arising from a Regular First Appeal allowed by the Karnataka High Court against a trial court decree; the appeal called in question whether plaintiffs had proved that their mother was validly married to the deceased owner of the suit lands and thereby entitled to a half-share by way of partition.

The Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court’s decree directing partition in favour of the plaintiffs. The judgment held that the oral testimony of a long‑standing village witness (P.W.2) and the genealogical chart, read together, satisfied the requirement of “special means of knowledge” under Section 50 of the Evidence Act and attracted the presumption of legitimate wedlock arising from prolonged cohabitation. The Court further drew an adverse inference from the failure of defendant No.1 to give evidence despite being physically present during proceedings, and emphasised that entries in revenue records were not conclusive proof of title. The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “Such prolonged cohabitation, coupled with the testimony of P.W.2 (Hanumanthappa), attracts a strong presumption in favour of a valid wedlock. Although the presumption is rebuttable, the onus lies on defendant No. 1 to disprove the legitimacy of the relationship. In the present case, defendant No. 1, except for mere denial, has not substantiated any material, oral or documentary, to rebut the presumption of a valid marriage between the deceased Dasabovi and the plaintiffs’ mother.”

Background
The dispute concerned partition of several agricultural survey numbers and a house in Devigere and Kallahally villages, Hosadurga Taluk. The plaintiffs asserted that their grandfather Thimmabovi Vellappa’s son Dasabovi married their mother (Bheemakka/Sathyakka) and that the suit properties formed part of Dasabovi’s ancestral share; after a later relationship with Chowdamma (defendant No.1) the plaintiffs’ mother was ousted and they were denied their share. The trial court framed issues and dismissed the suit; on first appeal the High Court relied principally on P.W.2 (Hanumanthappa), accepted his account of marriage and co‑possession, set aside the trial judgment and decreed partition.

On appeal to the Supreme Court the defendants argued that the plaintiffs failed to prove factum of marriage, relied on revenue entries in their favour, and challenged the High Court’s adverse inference from defendant No.1’s non‑examination. The plaintiffs relied on P.W.2’s unshaken testimony and Ex.P‑7 genealogical chart. The Supreme Court examined Section 50 of the Evidence Act and authorities on proof of pedigree and presumption of marriage where prolonged cohabitation was proved. The Court noted that “the testimony of P.W.2…falls within the ambit of Section 50” and accepted that, in the absence of contemporaneous documentary proof, such personal testimony coupled with the genealogy warranted the presumption of marriage. The Court reiterated that “It is well settled that an entry in revenue records does not confer title on a person whose name appears in record‑of‑rights. It is settled law that entries in the revenue records or jamabandi have only ‘fiscal purpose’ i.e. payment of land revenue, and no ownership is conferred on the basis of such entries.” It further recorded that defendant No.1, though present in court on several occasions, did not avail Order XXVI Rule 1 (commission) or herself give evidence; the Court treated that silence as inviting an adverse inference under Section 114(g) of the Evidence Act. The Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiffs had discharged their burden and that the defendants failed to rebut the presumption; the appeal was dismissed and the High Court decree in favour of the plaintiffs was affirmed. No costs were ordered.

Case Details:
Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL NO. 11330 OF 2011
Case Title: Chowdamma (D) by LR and Another Versus Venkatappa (D) by LRs and Another