6.Merely marking the birth certificate of the respondent's son as Ex.P7, cannot improve or alter the case of the appellant as he should have produced reliable evidence to prove his case. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant argued that there was an order obtained from the Court below directing to undergo DNA test in the Government Hospital, but no order has been produced to prove his submission. More over, the appellant has not undergone the DNA test to establish the paternity of the child and no such efforts have been taken by the appellant to prove his case by producing sufficient materials to show that the child was not born to him. The concurrent findings of fact arrived at by both the Trial Court and the Appellate Court are in order. Thus, the substantial questions of law are answered against the appellant. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, C.M.P. No.6095 of 2001 is closed. s/dAssistant Registrar(CS V) True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar vga To 1.The II Additional District Judge, Erode 2.The Subordinate Judge, Bhavani Copy to The Section officer VR Section High Court, Madras 104. +1 CC to Mr.S.Vijaya Kumar, advocate sr 55531. C.M.S.A. No.11 of 2001 and C.M.P. No.6095 of 2001 SAI(CO) SP(03/02/2020)
