Question

PRINCIPLE: The fact that any person was born during the continuance of a valid marriage between his mother and any man, or within two hundred and eighty days after its dissolution, the mother remaining unmarried, shall be conclusive proof that he is the legitimate son of that man, unless it can be shown that the parties to the marriage had no access to each other at any time when he could have been begotten.
FACTS: X and Y married on January 15, 1995., Y, the wife of X, never left her parental home and never went to her husband's home, A boy was born to Y on July 15, 1995. For the Court, ______.

• A. There shall be a conclusive proof that the boy is the legitimate son of X
• B. There shall be no conclusive proof that the boy is the legitimate son of X
• C. There shall be a conclusive proof that the boy is the illegitimate son of X
• D. There shall be no evidence at all

Answer 1

Answer: (C)

There shall be a conclusive proof that the boy is the illegitimate son of X

To be a legitimate child of a man it must be proved that -

a. Must be born during the continuance of a Valid marriage of mother and the man; OR

b. Born within 280 days after the dissolution of marriage.

Unless it is proved that the parties had no access to each other at any time when the child could have been begotten.

Here, the boy was born on July 15, 1995, that means that the child was conceived or begotten at least 8 months back ie, somewhere in December 1994.

Since, X and Y entered into a valid marriage on Jan 15, 1995. This shows that the parties did not enter into valid marriage at the time the child was conceived. Therefore, it can be said that there is no conclusive proof that the child is a legitimate son of X. But since it is not given in the factual matrix that the party had absolutely no access to each other at the time when the child was begotten. Therefore, it cannot be said that there shall be a conclusive proof that the boy is the illegitimate son of X.

Hence option C is the most appropriate answer.