Wijesundera v. Wijekoon – sllr 1990 volume 2 page 001

In the case between the Applicant‑Appellant (the wife) and the Respondent‑Respondent (the husband), the court addressed whether the presumption of legitimacy under Section 112 of the Evidence Ordinance could be rebutted by evidence indicating a lack of access between the husband and wife during the period when the child could have been conceived, as well as the wife’s entitlement to maintenance. The holding determined that, despite the existence of a legal marriage and initial presumption of legitimacy, the husband’s consistent and corroborated testimony established, beyond reasonable doubt, the absence of access necessary to rebut the presumption. The principle reaffirmed is that the presumption of legitimacy requires strong, cogent evidence to be displaced, and the right to maintenance i