ORDER :

Goutam Bhaduri, J

1. The instant petition is against the order dated 22.06.2021 passed by the Family Court, Mahasamund whereby the application filed by the appellant under Regulation 13(7) of the Adoption Regulations, 2017 seeking annulment of adoption, was dismissed.

2. Brief facts of this case are that the child namely Ganeshu was given on adoption u/s 56(3) of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (henceforth called as “the Act of 2015”) to Mangli Bai Miri and her husband Hemlal Miri on 30.09.2019. After such adoption, the child was given to the custody of appellant and her husband with an effect that they were biological parents and the child became the child of adoptive parents. Thereafter, on 09.11.2020 the father Hemlal Miri died. Subsequently, an application was filed by the appellant mother that the child is unable to mixup and adjust in the atmosphere of adoptive family, thereby, he is not interested to stay in adoptive family. A counseling took place on 23.02.2021. After such counseling the application for annulment of adoption was filed by the appellant who is adoptive mother on the ground that the adopted child could not adjust himself in the adoptive family after death of Hemlal Miri.

3. Learned counsel for the appellant would submit that after the child was declared as adopted child on 31.10.2019 and he was being brought up in the adoptive family of the appellant but subsequently with passage of time he could not adjust which would be evident from the report of counseling dated 23.02.2021, therefore, the dissolution of the adoption be directed. He would submit that the statement recorded during counseling which is filed in this case would reveal that the adopted boy himself has made statement that he does not want to stay in the family of the appellant. Therefore, learned family Court failed to take into account the said fact and a wrong order was passed.

4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent opposes the arguments.

5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the documents.

6. Section 63 of the Act, 2015 lays down the effect of adoption, which purports that a child in respect of whom an adoption order is issued by the court, shall become the child of the adoptive parents, and the adoptive parents shall become the parents of the child as if the child had been born to the adoptive parents, for all purposes, including intestacy, with effect from the date on which the adoption order takes effect. It further purports that on and from such date all the ties of the child in the family of his or her birth shall stand severed and replaced by those created by the adoption order in the adoptive family.

7. In the instant case, the adoption order was passed in favour of the adoptive parents on 31.10.2019 and the application for dissolution as per the Adoption Regulation 2017 was filed by the adoptive mother Mangli Bai after death of Hemlal Miri, the father on 09.11.2020. The Adoption Regulation 2017 has been framed in exercise of the power conferred by clause (c) of Section 68 read with clause (3) of Section 2 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Regulation 3 prescribes the fundamental principles governing adoption which purports that the best interests and well-being of the children shall be of paramount consideration and certain guidelines has been provided. Clause (7) of Regulation 13 lays down that in case of dissolution, the application for annulment of adoption order shall be filed in the Court, which issued the adoption order. The “dissolution” has been defined in Regulation 2(8) which means the annulment of the adoption legally, due to non-adjustment of the child with the adoptive family, after the court decree for the adoption has been obtained. For the sake of convenience, regulation 2(8) which defines dissolution as also Regulation 13(7) which prescribes the procedure for dissolution are reproduced hereinbelow:

“2. Defi