JUDGMENT - BHATTACHARJEE A.M., C.J.:—The two questions that have been argued by the learned Counsel for the parties in this Second Appeal are : —

(1) Whether there was in fact in adoption as alleged ? and

(2) Whether there could in law be any such adoption?

A negative answer to any of the questions would warrant dismissal of, the appeal, while the appeal would have to be allowed if both these question$ are to be answered in the affirmative.

2. For far too long, the Hindus were under the hypnotic spell of the belief that marriage and sonship ensure great religious benefit. If this was true, then Brahmacharya and Sannyas could not be regarded to be highest religious Orders in Hindu religion. This was a myth fostered and nurtured to persuade people to lead a normal married life and to have children as our entire society has germinated around these two institutions of marriage and sonship. The tendency of our courts have, therefore, been to approach the questions relating to marriage and sonship ut res magis valeat quam pereat so that both marriage and sonship may flourish and not perish. As early as in 1869, the Privy Council declared in (Inderun v. Ramaswamy)1, 13 M.I.A. 141 at 158, th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document