In the name of Allah, the Merciful
National Supreme Court
Circle of Personal Status
Appeal number 249/2015
Issued by the Supreme Court of the Personal Status Department on 30/4/2015 under the chairmanship of
Mr. / Salah Al-Tijani Al-Amin and members: Abdul Rahim Abdul Sayed and Ms. Fadia Ahmad
Abdulkader “Judges of the Supreme Court”.
The record of appeal number 703 / S / 2015 has been submitted. Court of Appeal of Omdurman D A CH,
registered under number 97 / appeal / 2015
The appellant: Moukhtar Idriss Abdullah
Appellee: Zeinab Mohammad
The Judgment
This is an appeal filed by the Appellant personally against the Omdurman Court of Appeal decision MA /
703 / SCH, decision 669/2014, which provides for the annulment of the appeal.
The contested decision was issued on 14/12/2014 and learned by the appellant on 5/2/2015. He presented
his memorandum of appeal on 12/2/2015. Thus, it was submitted within the deadlines set out in Article
190 of the Code of Civil Procedure of 1983. For that, I see that it must be accepted.
The appeal contained the following reasons: He had not had sex with her for three years and did not see
signs of pregnancy. He asked that the decisions of the lower court be set aside and that the documents be
returned to the trial court to hear the witnesses and send them back to the medical examination to
determine whether they had given birth to the baby. In addition, he asked for a genetic test to deny the
filiation of this baby.
The main facts on the record show that the appellant brought Case No. 515 / K / 2014 to the Omdurman
Personal Status Tribunal in the face of the appellant, based on the refusal of parentage and he said that she
was his wife and had her divorce on 10/10/2014, after giving birth to her daughter Ahlam. She has a child
named Osama, a month old, and she said he is his son, although he has not had a relationship with her for
three years and has sought to override the filiation of the child. The Appellant confirmed her statement but
said that they continued to cohabit sexually and that he knew she was pregnant and had sought to file the
case. While, the appellant insisted on the case and that he had already found her with another man in their
matrimonial home. The court of first instance finally decided to close the case and dismiss the case on
18/11/2014. The appellant did not accept the judgment of the above-mentioned court and appealed the
decision of the Omdurman Court of Appeal, whose decision rendered the appeal.
Having reviewed all the other documents and decisions rendered and the reasons for the appeal, I find that
the impugned decision is valid and does not constitute a violation of the law because the appellant denied
the filiation of the child because that he found another man in the matrimonial home and that he had not
been sleeping with her for three years, although the appeal indicates that she did not even have children.
In both cases, we find that filiation was set without the mattress, for the possibilities of a meeting between
the spouses after the marriage contract. The Appellant acknowledged that he was staying with her in the
matrimonial home, which was an accepted condition for lawyers. Sexual intercourse is possible in
accordance with Article 98 of the Personal Status Act of 1991. This is contrary to the case of parentage.

Select target paragraph3