Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act: Consent of the wife mandatory for proving adoption, Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday highlighted that the compliance of the conditions mentioned in Sections 7 and 11 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, are mandatory for an adoption to be treated as valid. [M Vanaja v M Sarala Devi (Dead)].As observed by the Bench of Justices L Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta, these provisions lay down that the following conditions must be satisfied for a valid adopting recognised in law, i.e.the consent of the wife before a male Hindu adopts a child;proof of the ceremony of actual giving and taking in adoption.In the case at hand, however, the appellant before the Court could only show that she was treated like a daughter by the man claimed to be her adoptive father. On the other hand, the wife of the alleged adoptive father, al the appellant's aunt, denied claims that the appellant was their adopted daughter. .The appellant had filed a partition suit with respect to property being occupied by her aunt. The appellant's original parents had passed away when she was a child. Thereafter, appellant claimed that, her mother's sister and her husband took in the appellant as their adopted child. .Her uncle, whom she claimed was her adoptive father, passed away intestate in 2003. The appellant claimed a stake in his property, in her alleged capacity as his adopted child. .When her aunt refused to partition the property, the appellant filed a suit in the trial court. The suit was later dismissed by both the trial court and the High Court, leading the appellant to approach the Supreme Court in further appeal. .The Supreme Court noted that there was no evidence to show that the adoption took place in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the Act of 1956, apart from the appellant's statement in that respect..The submissions of the appellant that “in the records of School and College, the names of the original Respondent and her husband were entered as the parents of the Appellant”, were also found insufficient to prove that she was, in fact, adopted..The Court further noted that even the appellant's grandmother stated that the appellant was not adopted by her aunt and husband, although it was admitted that she was given to them to be raised. .To decide on the matter, the Court went on to cite the judgment in Ghisalal v. Dhapubai (Dead) by Lrs. & Ors wherein it held “that the consent of the wife is mandatory for proving adoption”..The Bench also took note that, “The Appellant admitted in her evidence that she does not have the proof of the ceremony of giving and taking of her in adoption.”.Thus, the Supreme Court found no error in the judgment of the High Court and dismissed the appeal accordingly..[Read the Judgement here]