The Supreme Court noted that the Family Court does not have the authority to hear a paternity claim arising from extra-marital affairs.

The Court remarked that since the Family Court's jurisdiction is confined to matrimonial matters, a paternity claim stemming from an extra-marital relationship must be filed in a regular Civil Court.

The bench, consisting of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan, was hearing a case in which the Respondent, a legitimate child of his mother and RK, filed a plea before the Family Court seeking a paternity test of the Appellant. The Respondent contended that the Appellant was his biological father, with whom his mother had an extra-marital affair.

The marital relationship between the Respondent's mother and RK was undisputed, and both had access to each other at the time the Respondent was conceived.

Despite a concurrent finding affirming that the Respondent was the legitimate child of RK, the Family Court reinstated the Section 125 CrPC maintenance proceedings against the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the High Court's approval of the maintenance proceedings, the Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.

Before the Supreme Court, the Appellant argued that since the marriage between the Respondent's mother and RK was undisputed, the paternity claim could not be made against him, as the paternity lies with RK and his wife. Additionally, he contended that the paternity plea was not maintainable before the Family Court, as the court lacked jurisdiction to decide on such a claim in the absence of a marital relationship between the Appellant and the Respondent's mother.

Agreeing with the Appellant's arguments, Justice Kant's judgment concluded that the High Court erred in upholding the Respondent's paternity claim against the Appellant. The Court emphasized that since no marital relationship existed between the Appellant and the Respondent's mother, the Family Court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain the paternity claim.

 It clarified that the Family Court's jurisdiction is limited to disputes arising from marital relationships and does not extend to claims based on alleged extra-marital affairs.

The Court referred to the case of Renubala Moharana v. Mina Mohanty (2004), where it was held that a Family Court cannot entertain a paternity claim unless there is a dispute regarding the marital relationship of the child's mother.

Case Title: Ivan Rathinam versus Milan Joseph

Click here to Read/Download the Judgement