Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 128

Law: Evidence Act, (1 of 1872)

Section: 114

(a) Muhammadan Law----Marriage--Presumption is in favour of marriage in the absence of direct evidence on the point provided however, evidence exists to show that a man and a woman have lived together as man and wife for a long time.Allah Dad v. Muhammad Ismail ILR 10 All-29, Muhammad Allah Dad v. Muhammad Ismail (1888) 10 All 289, and Sher Afzal v. Shamim Firdaus P L D 1980 S.C. 228 ref.(b) Qanun-e-Shahadat Order (10 of 1984)-- ,---Art. 128--Muhammadan Law--Legitimacy .of.. child -.-Presumption-�Legitimacy of a child may be presumed where there has been continuous cohabitation of the alleged parents, acknowledgement of the child by the father, treatment by the father of the mother and child, and repute and notoriety amongst members of the family, the community, or respectable members of the locality.Handbook of Muhammadan Law by Taybjee, 1966 Ed., Hamida Begum v. Murad Begum P L D 1975 SC 624 and Syed Habibur Rehman Chowdhry v. Syed Altaf Ali Chowdhry AIR 1922 PC 159 ref.(c) Words and phrases----- Terms "legitimacy" and "legitimation" --Distinction--Meaning and purport discussed. [p. 12] C(d) Evidence Act (I of 1872)-----S.114-Muhammadan Law-Legitimacy of child- -Uncertainty-�Presumption - - Acknowledgement - -Father of child made assertion in a mortgage deed that said deed was being executed as the mortgage amount was required for defraying the expenses of the marriage of his son (the child)--Such an acknowledgement, held, had the effect of raising a presumption of a valid marriage between the parents of the child and established the legitimacy of child.--[ Muhammadan Law]. [p. 12] Il`JUDGMENT NASIM HASAN SHAH. J.-- The dispute in this case relates to the inheritance of one Hakam. On his death in the year 1954, the land in dispute was mutated in the name of the appellant (Bashir), as his son. The respondents, who are the collaterals of Hakam, brought a suit for possession of the disputed land on the pleas that the appellant was not the legitimate son of . Hakam and that they, as collaterals, were exclusively entitled for succeed to his property. ,The suit was decreed by the trial Judge but dismissed on appeal,' by the learned District.…