In the name of Allah, The Beneficent, The Merciful
The National Supreme Court
Department of Personal Status law
Cassation Decision/475/2015
Issued by the bench of the Supreme Court of the Personal Status Department, on
13/8/2015 under the Chairmanship of Mr. Al-Bushra Othman Salih and the
membership of the Honorable judges of the National Supreme Court Mr. Abdul
Hameed Mohammed Andul Hameed and Mr. Ahmed Mohammed Abdul Hameed.
The appeal documents number 52/S/2015 were filed with the Appeal Court of the
state of Northern Darfur – Al Fashir with claim number 197/Ghaf/2015 Al Fashir’s
All registered under number 356/Cassation/2015
Appellant: Abdul Majid Abdulrahman Jalal Al-Din
Respondent: Tamador Al-Doma Ahmed

First Decision:
This is an application submitted to us on 13/7/2015 by Lawyer. Mr. Sineen
Mohammed Salih on behalf of his client, Abdul Majid Abdulrahman Jalal Al Dean
appealing the decision number A S SH/52/2015 issued on 2/7/2015 from the Appeal
Court of the State of Northern Darfur - Al Fashir, which ruled in favor of the decision
of the Court of the First instance and the appellant was notified of the decision in
question on 8/7/2015 whereas the Appeal was presented within the specified timeframe in accordance with Article 190 of the Civil Procedural Code for 1983,
therefore, it is accepted in form.
In terms of subject, and after reviewing the documents, the facts of the case in
question are summed up in that the respondent filed a preliminary claim at Al Fashir’s
Court with the Department of Personal Status Laws Civil against the appellant on
which she requested to rule in the appellant’s daughter’s named Mariam, on her favor
of her rightful aliment who is a minor of the age of 4 years old, after having
considered what to be fit and reasonable. (The appellant) admitted to the marriage of
the respondent and the subsequent divorce and denied that the minor belonged to him
and mentioned that he had married the respondent on 24/6/2010 and divorced her on
25/12/2010 and that the respondent gave birth to the girl after a full year from the
divorce date, and that the aliment was over-estimated and that he works as a janitor of
Public Restrooms in the local market and that his income does not exceeds 20 Pounds
a day and that he has 10 children under his care along with his wife and his own
parents and requested the rejection of the claim brought forward. that the claim be
rejected. But the respondent was adamant of her claim. The Court decided to hear the
evidence on the face of parenthood and ordered to register the parenthood’s claim and
after reviewing the claim of parenthood and the witnesses, the Court reached the

Select target paragraph3