The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently ruled that family courts do not have the jurisdiction to decide the question pertaining to validity of an adoption deed..The Bench of Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Rohit Kapoor was hearing a man’s appeal seeking guardianship of his nephew under the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890. A family court had earlier ruled that the plea in essence was challenging validity of an adoption deed but the proceedings relating to ‘adoption’ cannot be considered by it..Agreeing with the decision, the High Court noted that the parliament had not vested family courts with the jurisdiction to adjudicate matters pertaining to adoption even as it allowed them to deal with proceedings relating to guardianship of custody of minors.“This has been done despite the fact that both ‘Adoption’ and ‘Maintenance’ of persons covered under Section 2 of the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956, are governed by the said legislation (HAMA), as mentioned above. The said exclusion, to our mind is a conscience decision by the Parliament, keeping in view the overall scheme of the Family Courts Act, where a speedy, less formal, and conciliatory procedure is required to be followed, which may not be suitable for deciding disputes pertaining to the validity of an adoption deed,” the Court said..Thus, it rejected the argument on deemed jurisdiction of family courts in adoption matters.“Therefore, the first submission of the Appellant that the issue pertaining to custody and guardianship invariably includes the issue pertaining to adoption, as the final result of the adoption deed ultimately bestows the custody and the guardianship of the minor child and therefore the family courts would have deemed jurisdiction in adoption matters, lacks merit. Exclusion of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court has to be express and specifically conferred upon a Special Court and cannot be deemed.”.In the present case, the paternal uncle had filed a petition for appointment as his nephew’s guardian in 2019. This was after the minor’s father had passed away in 2016 and his mother married another man. The minor was given in adoption by his mother in 2017, allegedly in lieu of a loan taken by her deceased husband. The paternal uncle of the family alleged that a false deed had been registered for the adoption which was null and void on several counts.However, the mother said she was competent to give the minor up for adoption and that minor was living happily with his adoptive parents. She also said the child’s paternal uncle already has two daughters and thus is not competent to take the child’s guardianship. .The High Court held that the family court had rightly declined to entertain the paternal uncle’s plea, Hence, it rejected the appeal.Advocate Dr Pankaj Nanhera represented the appellant.Advocate Sanjiv Kumar Aggarwal represented the respondents.
