9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Whether a direction for DNA test can be given in a proceeding for issuance of a succession certificate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925. Analysis: The core issue in this appeal was whether a direction for a DNA test can be given in a proceeding for the issuance of a succession certificate under the Indian Succession Act, 1925. The appellant sought a DNA test of the respondent to establish paternity in a case where the respondent had filed for a succession certificate claiming to be the daughter of the deceased. The trial court allowed the application for DNA test primarily on the grounds of the respondent's initial concealment of facts and lack of cogent documentary evidence. However, the High Court set aside this direction, emphasizing the limited scope of the inquiry in a testamentary court and the need to rely on evidence produced during trial rather than creating evidence through a DNA test. The High Court's decision was supported by legal principles outlined in previous judgments, including the Supreme Court's ruling in Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal. This ruling highlighted that courts cannot order blood tests as a matter of routine and emphasized the need for a strong prima facie case to justify a DNA test. The court must consider the consequences of ordering a DNA test, especially in cases involving paternity disputes. The legal presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Act was also discussed, emphasizing the burden of proof on the party disputing paternity to establish non-access. Furthermore, the purpose of a succession certificate was clarified as facilitating debt collection and protecting parties dealing with representatives of deceased persons. The grant of a succession certificate does not establish the title of the grantee as the heir of the deceased but authorizes them to collect debts. The court reiterated that DNA tests should not be directed as a routine measure and should only be considered in deserving cases, as established in previous judgments. Ultimately, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision to set aside the direction for a DNA test in this case, emphasizing that the trial court's decision was unsustainable. The judgment clarified that the court had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the succession application, focusing solely on the issue of the DNA test direction. In conclusion, the judgment provided a detailed analysis of the legal principles surrounding DNA tests in succession cases, emphasizing the need for a strong prima facie case and the limited circumstances where a DNA test may be warranted. The decision highlighted the importance of relying on existing evidence and legal presumptions in such matters, ultimately affirming the High Court's ruling in this case.
|
