DNA Test Cannot Be Sought To Deny Daughter's Paternity In Partition Suit; Other Evidence Must Be Led: AP High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a party cannot seek DNA test to disprove paternity of his daughter in a partition suit, and the party must establish its case to disprove paternity through other evidence.Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao held that the petitioner could not seek a DNA test to disprove the respondent's claim of being his daughter and said:“Even assuming that the...
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has held that a party cannot seek DNA test to disprove paternity of his daughter in a partition suit, and the party must establish its case to disprove paternity through other evidence.
Justice Tarlada Rajasekhar Rao held that the petitioner could not seek a DNA test to disprove the respondent's claim of being his daughter and said:
“Even assuming that the respondent is not a daughter of the petitioner herein. The petitioner cannot file an application to send the respondent for DNA test particularly when the plaintiff is claiming partition of the suit schedule properties to prove that the respondent is not a daughter of the petitioner. He has to adduce the evidence in any other manner to prove that the respondent is not the daughter of the petitioner. The petitioner cannot seek a DNA test. For whatever reason the trial Court has rightly dismissed the application. Hence, this Court does not find any merit.”
The Court further relied upon the Supreme Court's decisions in Aparna Ajinkya Firodia v. Ajinkya Arun Firodia, (2024) 7 SCC 773 which held that requests for DNA testing must be examined from the perspective of the child and not the parents, and on Goutam Kundu v. State of West Bengal, AIR 1993 SC 2295 which cautioned against ordering blood tests routinely in view of the strong presumption of legitimacy attached to a child born during a valid marriage under Section 112 of the Evidence Act.
The case arose from a plea filed by the petitioner against an order dismissing his application under Order XXVI Rule 10-A read with Section 151 CPC seeking a direction for DNA testing. The respondent in the case had instituted a partition suit claiming rights over the suit schedule properties, while the petitioner disputed the respondent's paternity by contending that she was not his biological daughter, but the daughter of his elder brother.
The petitioner argued that since the plaintiff refused to undergo a DNA test, the Court ought to draw an adverse inference against her. It was further contended that the DNA test would go to the root of the dispute and assist in determining the issue of paternity in the partition proceedings.
However, the High Court observed that the petitioner could not insist upon a DNA test in order to disprove the respondent's claim in the partition suit and held that such a plea must be established through other evidence available in law.
Finding no merit in the revision petition, the High Court upheld the trial court's order dismissing the application for DNA testing and imposed costs of Rs.3,000.
Case Title: Saradaga Narasayya Reddy v. Dingu Kanaka Mahalakshmi
Case Number: Civil Revision Petition No. 1339/2026
Counsel for Petitioner: Rayaprolu Srikanth