MRS. AKELLA LALITHA versus SRI KONDA HANUMANTHA RAO & ANR.

Citation: [2022] 6 S.C.R. 790 · Decided: 28-07-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DINESH MAHESHWARI · Disposal: Case Partly allowed

cites 3 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
790
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 6 S.C.R.
MRS. AKELLA LALITHA
v.
SRI KONDA HANUMANTHA RAO & ANR.
(Civil Appeal Nos. 6325-6326 of 2015)
JULY 28, 2022
[DINESH MAHESHWARI AND KRISHNA MURARI, JJ.]
Family Law – Surname of child – Dispute between Appellant-
mother and respondent-grandparents, (parents of deceased father
of the child) with regard to surname given to the child – Whether
Appellant-mother, who is the only natural/legal guardian of the child
after the death of the biological father can decide the surname of
the child – Can she give him the surname of her second husband
whom she remarried after the death of her first husband and can
she give the child for adoption to her husband – Held: Appellant-
mother being the only natural guardian of the child has the right to
decide the surname of the child – She also has the right to give the
child in adoption – After demise of her first husband, being the
only natural guardian of the child, the appellant-mother cannot be
lawfully restrained from including the child in her new family and
deciding the surname of the child – Nothing unusual in Appellant-
mother, upon remarriage having given the child the surname of her
husband or even giving the child in adoption to her husband –
Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act,1956 – s.6 – Hindu Adoption
and Maintenance Act, 1956 – s.9(3) and 12.
Family Law – Surname of child – Dispute between Appellant-
mother and respondent-grandparents (parents of deceased father
of the child) with regard to surname given to the child – Appellant-
mother remarried after death of her first husband  – Whether High
Court had the power to direct Appellant-mother to change the
surname of the child specially when such relief was never sought
by respondents in their petition before the trial court – Held: The
Court may have the power to intervene but only when a prayer
specific to that effect is made and such prayer must be centered on
the premise that child’s interest is the primary consideration and it
[2022] 6 S.C.R. 790
790
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
791
outweighs all other considerations – While the Court is not apathetic
to the predicament of the Respondent grandparents, it is a fact that
absolutely no relief was ever sought by them for the change of
surname of the child to that of first husband/ son of respondents –
In this case while directing for change of surname of the child, the
High Court traversed beyond pleadings and such directions are
liable to be set aside on this ground – Hindu Minority and
Guardianship Act, 1956 – s.6 – Hindu Adoption and Maintenance
Act, 1956 – s.9(3).
Family Law – Surname – Relevance of – Discussed.
Family Law – Adoption – Object in the past – Modern
adoption theory – Held: While the main object of adoption in the
past has been to secure the performance of one’s funeral rights
and to preserve the continuance of one’s lineage, in recent times,
the modern adoption theory aims to restore family life to a child
deprived of his or her biological family.
Pleadings – Grants of relief for which no prayer or pleading
was made – If justified – Held: Relief not found on pleadings should
not be granted – If a Court considers or grants a relief for which
no prayer or pleading was made depriving the respondent of an
opportunity to oppose or resist such relief, it would lead to
miscarriage of justice.
Partly allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1. After the demise of her first husband, being
the only natural guardian of the child one fails to see how the
mother can be lawfully restrained from including the child in her
new family and deciding the surname of the child. A surname refers
to the name a person shares with other members of that person’s
family, distinguished from that person’s given name or names; a
family name. Surname is not only indicative of lineage and should
not be understood just in context of history, culture and lineage
but more importantly the role it plays is with regard to the social
reality along with a sense of being for children in their particular
environment. Homogeneity of surname emerges as a mode to
create, sustain and display ‘family’. [Para 10][797-B-C]
MRS. AKELLA LALITHA v. SRI KONDA HANUMANTHA RAO
& ANR.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
792
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 6 S.C.R.
1.2. The direction of the High Court to include the name of
the Appellant’s husband as step-father in documents is almost
cruel and mindless of how it would impact the mental health and
self-esteem of the child. A name is important 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.