The court emphasized the importance of proving adoption by cogent and reliable evidence, considering the surrounding circumstances and the conduct of the parties.

( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by the plaintiff against the decree dated 11th July 1961, made by the Civil judge, Senior Division Belgaum, dismissing his suit to recover the suit schedule properties as the adopted son of one Venkatesh.

( 2 ) BY his plaint dated 25th September 1958, he alleged that one Krishnaji was a Watandar kulkarni of Holihosur in Bailhongal Taluk. He had two sons--Venkatesh and Shama Rao--and a daughter by name Mathurabai, who is defendant 3 in the suit. Shama Rao died on 29th september 1941 without a male issue, Chimmabai defendant 1--is his wife, and alakananda--defendant 2--is his daughter. Venkatesh was the sole surviving coparcener; plaintiff is related to Venkatesh, being the grandson of Ranga Rao, his maternal uncle. Venkatesh in order to continue his line and to obtain salvation, adopted plaintiff with the ceremonies on the 16th december 1941 and, on the same day, executed a registered deed of adoption. A photograph of the adoption ceremony was also taken. He thus became the adopted son of Venkatesh. Venkatesh died on 3rd December 1957, and after his death, he (plaintiff) alone is the sole surviving coparcener and therefore he is entitled to claim the entire suit schedule properties as the properties of his adoptive father.

( 3 ) HE also alleged that on 6th November 1943, Venkatesh executed two sale deeds--Exts. 196 and 193--in favour of defendants 2 and 3 respectively. By Exhibit 196, he conveyed the lands described in schedule 'b' in favour of defendant 1 of Rs. 12,000. The said sale deed is without consideration and is not binding on him. By Ext. 193, he (Venkatesh) conveyed the lands described in schedule 'c' to the plaint in favour of Mathurabai, defendant 3, for Rs. 11,000/ -. That sale deed also is without consideration. He further understands that the said defendant 3 has passed a deed of gift in favour of defendant 2 in respect of some of the aforesaid properties. Those deeds are not binding on him.

( 4 ) PLAINTIFF then alleged that the watan properties of his adoptive family were resumed by the government after the abolition of watans, and he is entitled to claim compensation payable in respect there of under the Watan Abolition Act. He also alleged that defendant 4 claimed to be an adopted son of defendant 1, but he has no interest in the property since his suit claiming a declaration that he is the adopted son of defendant 1, has been dismissed and his rights, if any, have been extinguished. The other defendants 5 to 24 are the tenants of the suit lands.

( 5 ) I have stated the facts necessary for the purpose of this appeal since we are not concerned with the other facts alleged in the plaint. On these allegations, he claimed the possession of the suit schedule properties with mesne profits after annulling the said two sale deeds and the deed of gift. He also claimed a declaration that he has a right to recover compensation amount payable under the Watan Abolition Act.

( 6 ) BY their written statements, defendants 1, 2 and 4 contested the plaintiff's claim as an adopted son, and the reliefs asked for on that basis.

( 7 ) DEFENDANT 1, in her written statement, contended that her husband's family was a well-to-do family. She was not only Venkatesh brother's wife but also his niece, and even after the death of her husband Shama Rao, she was staying with Venkatesh and Mathurabai, who being a child-widow was also staying with them.

( 8 ) VENKATESH had almost lost his eye-sight, and he being a Watandar Kulkarni and being a palidar, was rendering service to the Government through his representative. On account of this infirmity, he remained unmarried. Venkatesh had absolutely no mind to adopt anybody. However, while she was at her parents' house at Dharwar, he was taken away to Dharwar by narayan (father of the present plaintiff) and Ranga Rao (his grandfather), where Narayan was serving as Sub-Inspector of Police, on the pretext that the 'jawal' or tonsure ceremony of the plaint