Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
PARTH PRATEEM SAHU
Union Of India, Railway Administration, General Manager – Appellant
Versus
Lakhi Ram Yadav – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Parth Prateem Sahu, J.
1. This is defendants’ first appeal filed under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure questioning legality and sustainability of judgment and decree dated 14th October 2010 passed in Civil Suit No.7-A/2009 by Third Additional District Judge (FTC), Manendragarh, District- Koria whereby suit filed by respondent/plaintiff was allowed and plaintiff was declared to be adopted son of Late Papa Rao and Laxmibai.
2. Facts relevant for disposal of this appeal are that respondents/plaintiff filed a suit for his declaration to be adopted son of Late Papa Rao pleading therein that Papa Rao and Laxmi Bai were issue-less. Father of plaintiff and Papa Rao were known to each other as they were friend. On the request made by Papa Rao, biological parents of plaintiff agreed to give plaintiff in adoption. It is also pleaded that when plaintiff was aged about 5-6 years, plaintiff was given to Papa Rao and his wife Laxmi Bai in accordance with customs prevailing in their community. Give and take ceremony was completed in his childhood. He was brought up and grown along with his adoptive father and mother. During lifetime, Papa Rao had nominated the plaintiff as nomine
The burden of proof lies on the claimant to establish valid adoption as per statutory requirements; registered deeds are rebuttable and do not eliminate the need for actual proof.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the adoption deed was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation, and the physical act of giving and taking of adoption did not take place in acc....
The court affirmed that for a valid adoption, the consent of the adopting father's wife and proof of the ceremony of giving and taking are mandatory under the Maintenance and Adoption Act, 1956.
The validity of an adoption requires strict compliance with statutory conditions, including the consent of the biological mother, and such conditions were not met in this case.
Point of law: unless there is a proof of custom or usage to take a boy in adoption who is more than 15 years old, the boy cannot be taken on adoption. Therefore, while answering substantial question ....
Point of law: Capacity of a male Hindu to take in adoption-Any male Hindu who is of sound mind and is not a minor has the capacity to take a son or a daughter in adoption. Provided that, if he has a ....
Adoption requires strict adherence to legal prerequisites, including consent from both biological parents, making an invalid registration insufficient for legitimacy.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the validity of the adoption deed and the plaintiff's lack of locus standi to question the adoption.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
