The registered adoption deed is presumed valid under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, unless disproven, and customs allowing adoption of boys over 15 years are judicially recognized.

JUDGMENT :

1) By this Appeal, the Appellant challenges decree dated 16 April 2018 passed by the Ad-hoc District Judge-1, Barshi in Regular Civil Appeal No. 229/2014 (Old R.C.S. No. 405/2012) by which the frst Appellate Court has proceeded to dismiss Appellant’s Appeal and has confrmed the Decree dated 25 July 2012 passed by the Civil Judge Senior Division, Barshi in Regular Civil Suit No. 47/2012. The Trial Court has decreed the suit fled by Plaintif/Respondents and has directed Defendant/Appellant to handover possession of the suit property to Plaintifs.

2) Plaintifs are daughters of Ramchandra Manohar Patil (Defendant No.1), who owned the suit properties bearing Gat Nos.977, 680, 962 and 984 at Village-Bavi, Taluka-Barshi, District-Solapur. Appellant/Defendant No.2-Santosh Gahirinath Patil is Plaintifs’ cousin. Plaintifs’ mother, Ranjana passed away in the year 1983, by which time, both Plaintifs were married. It is Plaintifs’ case that after the death of their mother, Defendant No.1-Father started residing with Plaintifs and used to attend the suit properties. Plaintifs pleaded that after they obtained the 7/12 extracts of the suit properties, they discovered that the second Defendant had mutated his name to the suit properties. Such mutation was made by representing that Defendant No.2 was adopted by Defendant No.1. Plaintifs claimed that no such adoption had taken place and the second Defendant did not have any right, title or interest in the suit properties. Defendant No.1-father appeared in the suit and fled Written Statement admitting contents of the plaint and denied that he had executed any Adoption Deed or any Will in favour of Second Defendant. Defendant No. 2 also resisted the suit by fling Written Statement and relied upon Adoption Deed dated 6 December 1990. He claimed that an adoption ceremony was held at Ram Mandir, Barshi and the Adoption Deed was registered in the presence of several witnesses. That Defendant No.2 accordingly changed his name as ‘Santosh Ramchandra Patil’. He claimed title and possession over the suit property. During the course of trial, Mangal Navnath Ghalke, Plaintif No.2 examined herself in addition to Plaintifs’ maternal uncle, Magan Ramling Argade. Defendant No.2 examined himself as a witness in addition to various other persons.

3) After considering the evidence on record, the Trial Court proceeded to decree the suit by Judgment and Order dated 25 July 2012. The Trial Court held that Defendant No.2 practiced fraud upon Defendant No.1 by mispresenting him and got forged and fabricated Adoption Deed executed on 6 December 1990. The Trial Court further held that execution of the Adoption Deed was not proved and that therefore Defendant No.2 is not the adopted son of Defendant No.1. The execution of Will dated 30 October 2007 by Defendant No. 1 was also held to be not proved. By recording above fndings, the Trial Court decreed the suit and held that Plaintifs are entitled to recover possession of the suit property from Defendant No.2. Defendant No.2 fled Regular Civil Appeal No.405/2012, which was later numbered as Regular Civil Appeal No. 229/2014. It appears that Defendant No.1-father died during pendency of the suit and was accordingly deleted from array of parties by the frst Appellate Court. The frst Appellate Court has confrmed the decree by dismissing the Appeal fled by Defendant No.2 by its judgment and order dated 16 April 2018.

4) Aggrieved by the Decree of the First Appellate Court confrming the Decree of the Trial Court, Appellant/Defendant No.2 has fled the present Appeal. This Court has admitted the Appeal by Order dated 2 May 2023 by framing following substantial questions of law :

(i) Whether in view of the provisions of Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 the trial and the frst Appellate Court could have gone into the issue of validity of adoption ceremony performed at the time of adoption of the Appellant when the adoption deed is registered?

(ii) Whet