LexSAWAN RAM & OTHERS versus KALA WANTI & OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c D SA WAN RAM & OTHERS v. KALA WANTI & OTHERS April 19, 1967 687 (K, N. WANCHOO, C.1., V. BHAllGAVA AND 0. K. MITTBR, J.1,] Hindu A.doptlon.r and Malntenanc. A.ct, 1956 (78 of 1956) S1. ·9(2) and 12-D11d mltu adoption 6'v1n by f/111'11118 and con.r1111 by motlilr, If v1111d-Adop1lon by widow, If allo to h111band- A. widow, whole hmband had died before the Hindu Succealon A.ct Clllll Into force, ~od respondent 2 after the lllforcement of the Act. Oii the widow\ du the a~t, the -t menloner of her hm- bllld, flied I ault Ill the adC?Ption, The trial c:ourt dl1ml-' the llllt. whlob, In apptll, the Hlab court uphelcl, In appeal, to thla CoUrt the a~t oontended that (I) the adoption was- illvalld Wider oL (II) of s. 6 read with s. 9(2) ol the Hllldu Mc>Ptlona 111d Malnte- Dllllle Act 11 tho ion wu slven In idoPtlon bY his mOther even thouah Illa father wu alive; and (ii) under the Rindu Adoptions and Maintenance Aat, 111 Independent rlaht of adoption Is slven to Hilldu female and If a wldOw adopti a ion, hi becomes the adoPtecl 1011 of the widow only and wu DOt dffmed to be the 1011 of her dlCeued huiband. HBLD : The appeal muit be d!trnl.....,, <lfun The evidence Oii record atablilhed that the IOll waa t;i ID ='had t?.!1v:'~1t ~~~:n~r t a1Udll the falhii'. The foUOwlna Hlltace lllath!I that the mother o tile E bor had .'put her thumbomlrk hereunder In tom of her COJ11111t,' wu puf In the deed, becauae 1. 9(2) of the AdOl)lion~ end Melntena"c• Act -tlom that the father Is not to elordN hla rlaht ·Of slvlna his child lo adoDtlon, Ave with the OOllHllt of the mother. ''The COllHllt of the mother" havlna been Uled Ill the Act which wu applicable, the drafts. men of the deid Included ill It the f11t that the boy'1 mother had actual· ly alven hll' conaeat and obtained her thumb-lmprelllon In token thenof, F [~D·HJ (Ii) The provision In 1. 12 of the Act, mak11 It clear that, on adoD- tloll bY a Hilldu female who has been married, the adopted aoa will, In ~t, be. the adopted ~ of her hmband also. Under the Shutrlc Law, if a child wu aCIOplld bY a widow he wu treated u a natural-born child 111d; comequently, he could ht other members of the family of rlahts v11ted ID them prior to his adoption. It waa onlY with. the G limited object of avoldlna any such oo~nce on the adoption of a cblld by a Hindu widow that the provislomi In clauae (c) of the proviso to a. ~2, and section 13 of the AC! were Incorporated In that !'9IPICt. the rlahts of the. :C~tecl child were reitrlcted. It Is to' be noted that this m::cllon was pl on the rights Of a child idopted by either 1 male u or a female Hindu and not r; Ill a cue of acloptfon by a ~~!_~nleaddu. This reitrlcllo11 on tho rl ta of the i!IOPted cb11d ca1111ot um&WRI, tO Illy Inference that I C adopted by I widow will noi H - ~B1eemed to be the adopted son of her deceased huiband. [694B.C. And~':i 0 w!"k1~R:'~,,~ais6; Cs~:'lnumayya and another, [1964) 1 688 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1967]38.C.R. CIVIL APPELLATE JurusmcnoN: Civil Appeal No. 728 of 1964. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated September 25, 1961 of the Punjab High Court in Civil Regular Second Appeal 343 of 1961. S. K. Mehta and K. L. Mehta, for the appellant. A. [). Mathur, for the respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bhargava, J. One Ramji Dass died leaving behind a widow, Smt. Bhagwani. At the time of his death, he owned some land and a house. 4 bighas and 17 biswas of the land were mort- gaged by.Smt. Bhagwani on 2nd May, 1948 in favour.of respon- dent No. 3, Babu Ram. Later, on 22nd August, 1949, she executed a deed of gift in respect of the house and the land cover- ing an area of 50 bighas and 14 biswas in favour of Smt. Kala Wanti who was related to her as a grand-niece. Sawan Ram appellant instituted a suit for a declaration that both these alio- nations were without legal necessity and were not binding; on him, claiming that he was the nearest reversioner of Ramji Dass, being his collateral. In that suit, Smt. Bhagwani, the donee, Smt. Kala Wanti, respondent No. 1, and the mortgagee, Babu Ram, resoondent No. 3, were impleaded as defendants. That suit was decreed and Smt. Bhagwani went up in appeal to.the High Court. During the pendency of the appeal, Smt. Bhagwani adopted res,.,ondent No. 2, Deep Chand, the son of Brahmanand and his wife, res.,ondent No. 1, Smt. Kala Wanti. A deed of adoption
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.