HINDU ADOPTION UNDER INDIAN LAW AN ANALYSYS
HINDU
ADOPTION UNDER INDIAN LAW AN ANALYSYS
THE REASON FOR
INTRODUCTION OF HINDU ADOPTION AND MAINTENANCE ACT-1956:
The
subject of adoptions was extremely complicated under ancient uncodified Hindu
Law because property rights are particularly involved in matters relating to
Adoption. To remove the complexity in adoption process the Indian parliament
codify Hindu law and introduced the Hindu The Adoptions and Maintenance Act of
1956 which was passed by parliament
between 1955 and 1956.
The
1956 act was passed with the intention of simplifying all the principles of
ancient law in a statute enacted by the parliament. Because the Act's long
title clearly states that it is intended "to amend and codify the law
relating to adoptions," it must be assumed that the intention is not only
to codify the earlier law but also to amend so that if the 1956 Act conflicts
with any of the earlier decisions or texts, the Act prevails.
The
Supreme Court ruled that after the 1956 Act went into effect, there was no room
for customary adoption. Surajan Singh vs. Kartar Singh, 1974 (2) SCC 559: 1975
(2) SCR 742
SIGNIFICANT CHANGES
OCCURRED DUE TO INTRODUCTION OF HINDU ADOPTION AND MAINTENANCE ACT IN HINDU ADOPTIONS :
–
Due
to passage of the Hindu Adoptions and
Maintenance Act in 1956, many radical changes in Hindu adoptions occurred. The
Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act of 1956 resulted in the following
significant changes:
·
A female child cannot be adopted
under the old Hindu Law system. However, Sections 7 and 8 of the Hindu
Adoptions Act allow for the adoption of a female child as well.
·
Section 8 of the Act allows a
widow, divorcee, or unmarried person to adopt a female or male child. A wife
can also adopt a child, subject to the conditions outlined in Section 8 of the
Act.
·
The consent of the wife was not
required for adoption under old Hindu law. However, consent is required under
the Act of 1956 (Section 7).
·
Similarly, under the old Hindu Law
system, a father could give his son up for adoption without his wife's consent.
However, Section 9 of the new Act of 1956 requires that a father obtain the
consent of his wife before placing his child for adoption.
·
A person can be adopted under the
old Hindu Law system regardless of his age or whether the Adopted boy is married
or not. However, under the new Act of 1956, an adoptee must be under the age of
15 and unmarried, unless the custom allows such adoption.
·
Adoption was not permitted under
the old Hindu Law system unless a ceremony known as "Datta Homam" was
performed. However, according to Section 11 of the Act of 1956, no such
ceremony is required. Only the giving and taking of a child is necessary.
·
According to Section 13 of the
Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, an adoptive father or mother is not
deprived of the right to transfer property simply because their child has been
adopted. However, prior to 1956, an adoptive father was denied the right to
transfer his properties under the old Hindu Law system.
·
Adoption registration is not
required under the old Hindu Law system. However, the Act of 1956 requires
adoption registration.
·
A legal provision in the 1956
enactment states that if a child of opposite sex is to be adopted, there must
be a 21-year age difference between the Adopter and the Adoptee (Section 11).
There was no such provision in ancient Hindu law.
·
According to old Hindu law, the
Adopter and Adoptee must be of the same caste and Hindus. However, under the
Act of 1956, it is no longer necessary for the Adopter and Adoptee to be of the
same caste. It is, however, required that they be Hindus.
·
Section 12 of the Act of 1956
abandons the old fundamental theory of "relation back." Since a widow
can adopt for herself under the new Act, once vested property cannot be
divested.
·
Another significant change brought
about by the Act of 1956 is the ability of a female to adopt a child in her
individual capacity. Section 8 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956
states, among other things, that "Any female Hindu who is of sound mind,
who is not a minor, who is not married and if married whose marriage has been
dissolved or whose husband is dead or has completely and finally renounced the
world or has ceased to be a Hindu or has been declared by a court of competent
jurisdiction to be of unsound mind, has the capacity to take a son or daughter
in adoption" . Previously, a female could not adopt a child in her
individual capacity under Hindu law. She could only adopt in her husband's
name.
·
A boy who is deaf, dumb, or suffers
from any other defect, disease, or deformity could not be adopted under the old
Hindu Law system. However, under the new act, these disqualifications are not
considered when adopting a boy or girl because they are not considered in the
matter of succession. As a result, under the 1956 Act, a boy or girl with the
aforementioned defects may be legally given and taken in adoption.
·
There was a rule in the old Hindu
Law system that the boy to be adopted could not be a boy whose mother the
Adoptive Father could not legally marry. The Act of 1956 makes no such
restriction or limitation, and any boy or girl who meets other requirements may
be adopted.
·
Adoption of a boy was required
under the old Hindu Law system because the adoption of a girl was not recognized.
Adoption of a son or a daughter can be validly given and taken in adoption
under the Act of 1956.
· No one who has been adopted may be deprived of any property that was rightfully theirs prior to the adoption.
MAIN
OBJECT OF ADOPTION IN THE ANCIENT HINDU SOCIETY
In terms of adoption,
the ancient Hindu Society took a religious approach. A son was required to
perform his parents' last rites and to carry on the lineage. The secular
purpose of succession to property was indeed secondary to the parents
consenting to adoption, but as facts may show, it was primary to the parents
consenting to adoption. Following the adoption, all litigation centered on the
right to succession to property. The modern concept of adopting a child for no
religious reason other than to save and raise the child was unknown to Hindu
Law.
The Supreme Court
determined that adoption has two primary goals:
·
to ensure the performance of last
rites, and
· to continue the lineation. AIR
1963, SC 185 (1963) 2 SCR 440, Chandrasekhara Mudaliar vs. Kulandaivelu
Mudaliar.
CHANGES
AND EFFECT OF 1956 ACT ON HINDUS
In
relation to matters covered by this Act, any context, rule, or interpretation
of Hindu Law or any custom or usage prior to the commencement of the said Act
will be null and void. Any prior law that is inconsistent with the provisions
of the 1956 Act will not apply to Hindus.
ESSENTIAL
CONDITIONS FOR A VALID ADOPTION UNDER HINDU ADOPTION ACT
Section
6 of the Act specifies four essential conditions for a valid adoption:
- the person adopting has the
capacity and right to adopt;
- the person giving in adoption has
the capacity to do so;
- the person adopted is capable of
being taken in adoption; and
- the adoption is made in accordance
with the Act's provisions.
CAPACITY
OF MALE AND FEMALE HINDUS TO ADOPT CHILD UNDER HINDU ADOPTION ACT
A
Major Hindu who is of sound mind can adopt a son or daughter (Section 7). He
must be at least 21 years older than the female being adopted if he wishes to
adopt a daughter. He should get his wife's permission before adopting a son or
a daughter. A Female Major Hindu has the same right to adopt a son or a
daughter if she is (1) of sound mind, (2) not married, or (3) if married, the
marriage is dissolved or the husband is deceased. If a female Hindu wishes to
adopt a son, she must be 21 years older than the boy to be adopted. [Secs. 8
and 11(iv)]
PERSONS
CAPABLE OF GIVING IN ADOPTION
Where
the father is alive, the father alone has the right to give in Adoption, but
only with the mother's consent. If the mother is a widow, she may place the
child for adoption. Dhanraj vs. Suraj Bai, (1975) 2 SCC 251. However, a
stepmother cannot adopt her stepson. When both the father and mother are
deceased, the guardian may place the child for adoption with any person,
including the guardian himself, with the prior permission of the Court. (See
Section 9).
WHERE
BOTH THE FATHER AND MOTHER ARE DEAD
:-
Where
both the father and mother are deceased or have completely and finally
renounced the world or have abandoned the child or have been declared by a
court of competent jurisdiction to be of unsound mind, or where the parentage
of the child is unknown, the guardian of the child may give the child in
adoption to any person, including the guardian himself, with the prior
permission of the court (this provision is inserted by Amendment Act, 45 of
1962).
CONDITIONS
FOR GIVING AND TAKING ADOPTION:-
For a person to be given or taken in Adoption, the following conditions must be met: (1) he or she is a Hindu; (2) he or she has not already been adopted; (3) he or she has not been married; and (4) he or she has not reached the age of 15 years. The above conditions are found in Section 10, but there is an exception that states that if there is a custom or usage, a married person or a person over the age of 15 can also be adopted. However, the Supreme Court has ruled that unless there are exceptional circumstances, the only son should not be given or taken in adoption. Raghavamma vs. Chenchamma, AIR 1964, SC 136; 2 SCR 933 (1964).
A
FEW ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS A LEGITIMATE ADOPTION MUST ALSO MEET THE ADDITIONAL
REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN SECTION 11 OF THE ACT, WHICH ARE AS FOLLOWS:
- If a son is adopted, the Adoptive
Father or Mother must not have a son, son's son, or son's son's son;
- if a daughter is adopted, the
Adoptive Father or Mother must not have a daughter or a son's daughter;
- the same child may not be adopted
concurrently by two or more people.
- The child to be Adopted must be
actually given and taken in adoption by the concerned parents or guardians, and
there must be an intention to transfer the child from the family of its birth
to the family of its adoption. As previously stated, if the adoption is for a
son, the Adoptive Father or Mother must not have a son. The Supreme Court, on
the other hand, has ruled that a son in embryo does not invalidate an adoption.
The law makes no requirement that the Adoptive Mother be pregnant at the time
of the adoption. AIR 1964, SC 510 (1964), 4 SCR 497, Guramma vs. Mallappa.
NO
RELIGIOUS CEREMONIES OR DEEDS REQUIRED FOR A VALID ADOPTION
There
are no religious ceremonies required for a valid adoption under the 1956 Act.
What is important is that the parents intend to transfer the child from its
biological family to the adoptive family. The Act also does not require the
execution of a Deed of Adoption. However, if the parties registered any such
Deed, Section 16 of the Act enacts a presumption that the Act's provisions were
followed unless the contrary is proven.
DATTA
HOMAM IS NO LONGER REQUIRED FOR A VALID ADOPTION GIVING AND TAKING OF CHILD IS
EXTREMELY IMPORTANT:
As
previously stated, the 1956 Act does not require any Religious Ceremonies or a
Deed of Adoption for a valid adoption. The ancient Hindu Law that required a
"Datta Homam" is no longer required for a valid adoption. The giving
and taking of the child in adoption is critical for a valid adoption under
Section 11. The Supreme Court ruled that the words "with intent to
transfer the child from the family of its birth to the family of its
adoption" in Section 11 (iv) are merely indicative of the outcome of the parents'
actual giving and taking. The ceremony
of giving and taking is symbolic of the Adopted Son being transplanted from his
birth family to the adoptive family. Kartar Singh vs. Surjan Singh, 2 SCC 559
(1974), 1 SCR 742 (1975).
NO
SEX OR CASTE CONSIDERATIONS FOR ADOPTION:-
According
to ancient Hindu law, only sons could be adopted, not daughters, because only
sons could perform the last rites and continue the lineage. However, the 1956
Act recognizes the adoption of a daughter as well. Though adoption of a
daughter was not recognized under ancient Hindu Law, some broad-minded writers,
such as Nanda Pandit, advocated for it because such a daughter could be given
in marriage, earning the adoptive parents the merit of Kanyadana. See Nanda
Pandit's Dattaka Meemamsa. However, under ancient Hindu law, the adoption of a
daughter is not legal. A daughter may now be adopted, and such adopted daughter
will succeed to her parents' property to the extent permitted by Hindu Law of
Succession. The 1956 Act also eliminated all caste considerations for adopting
a child, which was a revolutionary change. Under ancient Hindu law, a Brahmin
could only adopt a Brahmin boy, a Kshatriya could only adopt a Kshatriya boy,
and so on and so forth, but now a person from one caste can adopt a boy or girl
from another caste. The above changes, which remove sex and caste
considerations, are in line with the most recent reformative needs of Hindu
society, as well as the principle of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the
Constitution.
A
stepfather who spends money on maintenance does not become an adoptive father.
The Supreme Court ruled in Ramdas alias Ramsuraj vs. Smt. Vandia Bai, AIR 1997
SC 1563, that there was no question of adoption by a stepfather simply because
the stepfather spent money on the upkeep and marriage of the stepchildren. It
would not imply that the step son was adopted by a stepfather with whom he was
living after his mother married the stepfather. Taking up the expenditure on
the occasion of the step daughter's marriage has no bearing on the adoption of
the step son.
EFFECT
OF ADOPTION SECTION 12 OF THE 1956 :-
Section
12 of the 1956 Act states that:
- the child adopted becomes the child
of his or her adoptive father or mother, and the child's ties in the family of
his or her birth are severed and replaced in the adoptive family;
- property already vested in the
child prior to adoption will continue to vest;
- the child cannot marry whom he or
she could not marry in the family of birth; and
- the adopted child will be adopted.
- The Supreme Court ruled that the child who is adopted has no ties to the family of his birth. In the adoptive family, these ties are automatically replaced by those created by the adoption.
- In other words, where the adoption is by a widow, the child adopted is linked to the sonship relationship with the deceased husband of the widow. Other husband's collateral relations would be linked to the child through the widow's deceased husband. Though Section 14 does not expressly state that the child adopted by the widow becomes the adopted son of the widow's husband, the son adopted by the widow is the result of adoption by either spouse in that the adoptive child becomes the child of both of these spouses. AIR 1970, SC 343; (1970) 2 SCR 1. Sita Bai vs. Ramchandra, AIR 1970, SC 343; (1970) 2 SCR 1.
- Previously, the law stated that
when a widow adopts, the adopted son's rights dated back to the date of the
adoptive father's death, and he had the right to end any partition that
occurred after the adoptive father's death and claim a share in the family
properties as if they were still joint.
- However, clause (c) of the proviso
to Section 12 of the Act eliminates the fiction that the adoptive son existed
at the time of the adoptive father's death and was claiming properties as if he
were a co-parcener. The rights of the
adopted child have been limited to this extent by codified law. This
restriction is imposed by said proviso (c) on the rights of a child adopted by
either a male Hindu or a female Hindu, and not just in the case of female Hindu
adoption. This limitation, however, does not imply that a child adopted by a
widow will not be considered the adopted son of her deceased husband. AIR 1967,
SC 1716: (1968) 2 SCJ 316; Sawan Ram vs. Kalawanti, AIR 1967, SC 1716: (1968) 2
SCJ 316.
LEGAL
RIGHTS OF AN ADOPTED CHILD:-
- Section 12 Proviso (c) departs from
Hindu Law by stating that the adopted child shall not divest any person of any
estate that had vested in him or her prior to the adoption. In the instant
case, the widow was the limited owner of the property after her husband died,
and after the Hindu Succession Act came into force, she became an absolute
owner, and thus the property of her husband vested in her, and she could not be
deprived of any of her rights in the property simply by adopting a child. The
adoption would come into play, and the adopted child would be able to obtain
the rights to which he is entitled following her death. AIR 1990 SC 1153,
Dinaji vs. Daddi.
- No one who has been adopted may be
deprived of any property that was rightfully theirs prior to the adoption.
STATUS
IN THE FAMILY OF AN ADOPTED CHILD AFTER ADOPTION
Adoption
is a personal act under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act; Section 12 of
the Act states that "he or she who is Adopted becomes completely a member
of the adoptive family for all purposes" - whether religious or secular.
AIR 1986, AP. 209, A.S. Sailaja vs. Principal, Kurnool Medical College and
Others.
DOCTRINE
OF 'RELATION BACK:-
The
following excerpt is from Sri R.K. Agarwal's Hindu Law, 1992 Edition, Page 156,
published by Pioneer Prints in Agra.- "When a widow adopts a son for her
husband after the property has vested in the collateral or heirs and successors
of the husband, in the eyes of law, it will be deemed that the adoption took
place during the husband's life-time and the adopted child was present at the
time of the husband's death, thus the adoption will relate back to the child
shall have a right to inherit the property of his adoptive father and if the
property has vested in other. This cardinal rule is based on the "Relation
Back" theory because the adoption dates back to when the widow's husband
died. The legal fiction that an adopted son's adoption relates back to the date
of his adoptive father puts him in the position of a posthumous son. The
"Relation Back" theory's scope is quite clear. It only applies when
the adopted son's claim relates to his adoptive father's estate. This estate
may be definite and certain, as when he is the sole and absolute owner of the
properties, or it may be fluctuating, as when he is a member of a Joint Hindu
Family, where the interest of the co-parceners is subject to increase or
decrease by death or birth. In either case, the adopted son is declared to be
entitled to the adoptive father's interest as of the date of his death. The
theory underlying this doctrine is that there should be no break in the line of
the adoptive father."
In
other words, under this doctrine, a son that the widow adopted was considered
to have entered the adoptive family on the day her husband passed away. The
adopted son was then placed in the role of a posthumous son, and by legal
fiction, all of his relationships within the adoptive family were traced back
to the date of his adoptive father's death.
However, the rule had two exceptions:-
- Any lawful alienation effected by a female heir since the death of the adoptive father and before the date of adoption was binding on the adopted son
- If the property by inheritance went to a collateral, (relatives of one another who descend from a common ancestor) the adoption could not divest the property which was vested in the heir of the collateral
PROOF
OF ADOPTION: -
Because
the Datta Homam religious rite was abolished by the 1956 Act, there is no need
to prove any such religious rites. Furthermore, no registered deed is required
for a valid adoption; however, if such a deed exists, Section 16 of the Act
presumes that the formalities of adoption have been followed according to law,
unless the contrary is proven.
The
person who seeks to displace natural succession to property by claiming
Adoption bears the burden of proving that there was a valid adoption.
Raghavamma vs. Chenchamma, AIR 1964, SC 136: (1964) 2 SCR 933, and Debi Prasad
vs. Tribeni Devi, AIR 1970, SC 1286: (1971) 1 SCR 101, are two cases.
Adoption
evidence should be free of all suspicions of fraud and so consistent and
probable that there is no reason to doubt its veracity. Chalti Bai vs. Kishori
Lal, AIR 1959, SC 504 (1959) SCJ 560. Because adoption is a family affair, the
witnesses are usually family members. AIR 1966, SC 1137 (1967), 2 SCJ 672,
Eramma vs. Mudappa. The mere performance of rites does not always support
adoption. Adoption is not established simply by living with a widow.
Chaltibai
vs. Kishorilal, AIR 1959, SC 504: (1959) SCJ 560. Unless there were compelling
and extraordinary circumstances, the Supreme Court stated that it is
unthinkable that an affluent family could have adopted in a village without
pomp and show. AIR 1964, SC 136, Raghavamma vs. Chenchamma.
DEED
OF ADOPTION IS NOT ADMISSIBLE IN EVIDENCE, IF NOT REGISTERED
:-
A
28-year-old man's adoption deed, which was not registered but only notarised by
a Notary Public, was ruled inadmissible as evidence in court. It was ruled that
the inadmissibility of such a document would not result in a failure of
justice, because Section 10 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act of 1956
sets the age limit for adoption at 15 years. Furthermore, the document was not
registered in accordance with Section 16 of the Act. As a result, the Court
ruled that a notarized document seeking to adopt a person over the age of 28
cannot be admitted as evidence. Nothing on record indicated that the party
attempted to introduce it into evidence, either in the ordinary course or
through an application under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
Rakhi vs. Ferozabad First Additional District Judge, AIR 2000 All. 166.
HINDU
LAW OF ADOPTION: -
- A statement made by the Testator in
his Will about a person as his adopted son was held to be certainly admissible
evidence, but there is no rule of law or prudence stating that such a statement
should not be regarded as conclusive, and the burden of proof falls heavily on
the person described as the adopted son. AIR 1980, SC 419, Banwarilal vs.
Trilokchand.
- In one case, the adoption Deed
stated unequivocally that the adopter had taken the adoptee in adoption. However,
the deed made no mention of the year, date, or location of adoption. It also
did not mention the names of those present at the time of adoption, as Adoption
Deeds usually do. In fact, there was no evidence to show when or where the
adoption occurred, or even whether the necessary ceremonies were carried out.
Furthermore, the evidence of the doctor examined by the adoptee cast doubt on
the adopter's mental capacity. The adoption was ruled invalid under the
circumstances. AIR 1980, SC 1754, Madanlal vs. Gopi.
- Adoption is a personal privilege
that cannot be extended to include an unlimited number of children. Parents
have the right to adopt only one male child under Ancient Hindu Law. Adoption
Law codification expanded this right to adopt a female child. It was determined
that the privilege of adoption could not be extended to more than one female
child. On this basis, the court denied the parents the right to adopt a second
female child. The constitutionality of the Act's provisions was challenged on
the basis of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. The Court ruled that, even
if Article 21 were stretched, it could not include the right to choose the size
of one's family. Furthermore, the Court refused to hear the petition on the
grounds that the Act had stood the test of time for nearly four decades. The
Court did, however, observe that there is a need for parliament to re-examine
the question of relaxing the Act's ban in light of the problem of adoption of
children in need. AIR 1998 Bom. 228 in Sandhya vs. Union of India.
CANCELLATION
OF ADOPTION :-
A
valid adoption cannot be cancelled by the adoptive father or mother, nor can
the adopted child renounce his or her status and return to his or her
biological family, according to Section 15 of the Act.
CONSIDERATION FOR ADOPTION
:-
Receiving
any payment or reward in consideration of the adoption is an offence under
Section 17 of the Act, and it is punishable by imprisonment for up to six
months, a fine, or both.
ADOPTION
OF AN ORPHAN :-
Only
through a court can an orphan be adopted.
HOW AN ADOPTION DEED CAN BE REGISTERED
An adoption
deed has to be executed by both the parties and can be registered like any
other document.
Comments
Post a Comment