SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(All) 2780

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.
Ashok Kumar and Ors. - Appellant
Versus
D.D.C. and Ors. - Respondent
Writ B. Nos. 32457 and 32637 of 2016
Decided On : 12-09-2016

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Shashwat Kishore Chaturvedi
For the Respondent: C.S.C., Anand Kumar Yadav, P.C. Pathak and Praveen Tripathi

The central legal point established in the judgment is the determination of the validity of adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and the rights of adopted children as preferential heirs.

Headnote:

Adoption - Dispute over land ownership - U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 - Section 12 - Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 - Sections 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12 - Validity of adoption, consent of natural mother, and sale deeds executed - Key legal provisions discussed include the requirements for a valid adoption, consent of natural mother, and the rights of adopted children under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.

Fact of the Case:

The dispute involved the ownership of land under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953, and the validity of adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The court analyzed the evidence related to the adoption of Ram Ratan and the execution of sale deeds by Smt. Ram Devi.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the adoption of Ram Ratan by Smt. Bari Dullaiya was valid and proved, and that the sale deeds executed by Smt. Ram Devi were void. It held that Ram Ratan was the preferential heir over Smt. Ram Devi and directed the refund of the sale consideration to the petitioners.

Issues: The key issues included the validity of the adoption of Ram Ratan, the consent of Smt. Ram Devi for the adoption, and the validity of the sale deeds executed by Smt. Ram Devi.

Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, to determine the validity of the adoption and the consent requirements. It also considered case law related to adoption and the rights of adopted children.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed, and the court affirmed the validity of the adoption of Ram Ratan and the voidance of the sale deeds executed by Smt. Ram Devi.

JUDGMENT

Ram Surat Ram (Maurya), J.

1. Heard Sri Shashwat Kishore Chaturvedi and Sri Shreeprakash Singh, for the petitioners and Sri P.C. Pathak, for the contesting respondent, Ram Ratan.

2. These writ petitions have been filed against the orders of Settlement Officer Consolidation dated 19.03.2016 and Deputy Director of Consolidation dated 17.06.2016, passed in the proceeding under Section 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, 1953 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').

3. The dispute between the parties is in respect of the land of basic consolidation year khatas 221 and 224 of village Nota, tahsil Tahrauli, district Jhansi, which were recorded in the name of Bari Dullaiya widow of Panna Lal. In pursuance thereof, she was allotted chak 389 (which consisted two chaks). Bari Dullaiya died in 1983. Assistant Consolidation Officer, by order dated 26.08.1984, passed in Case No. 259 of 1984, under Section 12 of the Act, recorded the name of Smt. Ram Devi wife of Kaushal Kishore as her heir, being her daughter. Smt. Ram Devi obtained permission of Settlement Officer Consolidation on 29.12.1987 under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act and executed a sale deed dated 31.12.1987 of half of the area of new plot 1808 [old plots 1066 (area 1.18 acre), 1949/1 (area 2.00 acre) and 1960 (area 0.51 acre)] (which was her second chak) in favour of Ashok Kumar. Smt. Ram Devi again obtained permission of Settlement Officer Consolidation on 16.07.1988 under Section 5(1)(c) of the Act and executed another sale deed dated 18.07.1988 of remaining half area of plots 1066 (area 1.18 acre), 1949/1 (area 2.00 acre) and 1960 (area 0.51 acre) in favour of Ashok Kumar. Smt. Ram Devi executed a sale deed dated 07.10.1989 of new plot 1842 (area 3.01 acre) (old plots 1220 (area 0.03 acre), 1221 (area 2.02 acre), 1228 (area 0.30 acre), 1229 (area 0.64 acre) and 1232 (area 0.02 acre) (which was her first chak) in favour of Jagat Narayan. The names of Ashok Kumar and Jagat Narain were also mutated, over the land purchased by them.

4. Ram Ratan (minor through guardian), filed an appeal (registered as Appeal No. 175 of 1988) on 01.02.1988 against the order of Assistant consolidation Officer dated 26.08.1984, along with delay condonation application, claiming himself as adopted son and heir of Smt. Bari Dullaiya and Panna Lal. Assistant Settlement Officer Consolidation, by an ex-parte order dated 30.09.1988, condoned the delay, allowed the appeal, set aside order of Assistant Consolidation Officer dated 26.08.1984 and remanded the matter to Consolidation Officer for trial on merit.

5. After remand, the matter was contested by Ashok Kumar and Jagat Narain (transferees of Smt. Ram Devi). Apart from documentary evidence, Ram Ratan examined Makkhan Singh, Brij Kishor, Ram Ratan and Kaushal Kishor, as the witnesses. The petitioners, apart from their documentary evidence, examined Jagat Narain, Krishna Bihari, Dwarika Prasad and Ashok Kumar as the witnesses. Consolidation Officer, after hearing the parties, by order dated 08.02.2013, held that admittedly Smt. Ram Devi was only daughter of Smt. Bari Dullaiya, whose name was mutated on 26.08.1984, after death of Smt. Bari Dullaiya, Smt. Ram Devi executed sale deeds dated 31.12.1987, 18.07.1988 and 07.10.1989. In these sale deeds, Kaushal Kishor, her husband was witness. Had adoption on 05.08.1980 and adoption deed dated 06.08.1980 were in the knowledge of Smt. Ram Devi, then she would not got her name mutated after death of Smt. Bari Dullaiya, as Ram Ratan was her son. Under Section 9 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1956) consent of natural mother of child is necessary for giving in adoption. Had Smt. Ram Devi given her consent for adoption, there would have no reason for her for not signing the adoption deed. No document has been filed to prove that Ram Ratan was ever recorded as an adopted son of Panna Lal or Smt. Bari Dullaiya. Valid adoption of Ram Ratan by Smt. Ram Dullaiya w


































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top