THE LEGAL BRIDGE

Bridging Law, Learning & Success

HINDU LAW — COMPREHENSIVE NOTES

Topic S-7

Presumption of Marriage — S.114 Evidence Act

Supplementary Topics

Relevant Sections: S.114 Evidence Act | S.50 BSA 2023

Priority: MEDIUM | Exam Relevance: RJS/DJS

www.thelegalbridge.in

Presumption of Marriage — S.114 Evidence Act / S.50 BSA

1. The Presumption

Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (now Section 50 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023) allows the court to presume the existence of any fact which it thinks likely to have happened, regard being had to the common course of natural events, human conduct, and public and private business. One of the most important applications of this presumption is the PRESUMPTION OF MARRIAGE arising from prolonged cohabitation.

The law presumes in favour of marriage and against concubinage. Where a man and woman have cohabited continuously for a long period of time, the court may presume that they are legally married, unless the contrary is proved. This is a rebuttable presumption — it can be displaced by evidence to the contrary.

2. Key Case Law

Badri Prasad v. Deputy Director Consolidation

AIR 1978 SC 1557

Ratio: A 50-year cohabitation raised a strong presumption of valid marriage. The SC held that if parties have lived as husband and wife for half a century, demanding eye-witness proof of marriage ceremony would be absurd.

SPS Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan

(1994) 1 SCC 460

Ratio: If a man and woman cohabit for a long period, the law presumes marriage under S.114. Children born from such relationship are legitimate.

Tulsa v. Durghatiya

(2008) 4 SCC 520

Ratio: Reiterated the presumption. Long cohabitation + community recognition = presumption of marriage. Children born are legitimate with inheritance rights.

D. Velusamy v. D. Patchaiammal

(2010) 10 SCC 469

Ratio: For a live-in relationship to attract the presumption, it must be ‘in the nature of marriage’ — both parties must hold themselves out as spouses, be of legal age, and be qualified to marry.

3. Conditions for the Presumption

Long and continuous cohabitation (no fixed period — depends on facts)
Couple held themselves out to society as husband and wife
Community/neighbors/relatives recognized them as married
Children were born and treated as legitimate
Joint participation in social/religious functions as a couple

4. Rebuttal of the Presumption

The presumption is rebuttable. It can be displaced by proving: (a) one of the parties was already married at the time of cohabitation; (b) the parties never held themselves out as married; (c) specific evidence that no marriage ceremony took place; (d) the relationship was clearly of a different nature (employer-employee, etc.). The burden of rebuttal lies on the party denying marriage, and it is a heavy burden.

5. Effect on Children

Where the presumption of marriage operates, children born from the relationship are deemed legitimate and have full rights of inheritance from both parents. Even where the presumption is rebutted, children may still have limited rights under S.16 HMA (children of void marriages) or maintenance under S.125 CrPC.

6. Exam Tips

‘BSTD’ — Presumption of Marriage Cases

B = Badri Prasad (50-year cohabitation) | S = SPS Balasubramanyam (long cohabitation = marriage) | T = Tulsa (children legitimate) | D = D. Velusamy (‘nature of marriage’ conditions).

EXAM TIP: The principle: ‘Law favours marriage over concubinage.’ This one-liner captures the entire doctrine. The presumption under S.114 Evidence Act / S.50 BSA is rebuttable but carries a heavy burden of rebuttal. Know the Badri Prasad 50-year example — it’s the most cited.

— End of Supplementary Topic S-7 —

www.thelegalbridge.in