Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Adoption Severs Ties with Family of Birth, Adopted Child Becomes Coparcener of Adoptive Family - Hyderabad High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Hyderabad High Court has clarified the legal implications of adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The court, comprising Honorable Mr. Justice P. Naveen Rao, Honorable Mr. Justice B. Viaysen Reddy, and Honorable Mr. Justice Nagesh Bheemapaka, delivered a landmark judgment on 27th June 2023, providing clarity on the rights and obligations of an adopted child.

The case involved the interpretation of proviso (b) to Section 12 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, which deals with the effect of adoption on coparcenary rights. The court examined previous conflicting opinions, analyzed authoritative legal texts such as Mayne's Hindu Law and Mulla on principles of Hindu Law, and considered relevant Supreme Court decisions to arrive at its conclusion.

The court unequivocally held that upon adoption, the child severs all ties with the family of birth and becomes a coparcener of the adoptive family. The judgment emphasized that the adopted child transplants into the adoptive family, relinquishing rights and obligations associated with the family of birth, including inheritance and the performance of rituals.

High court stated, "On adoption, the child ceases to be coparcener of the family of his/her birth and foregoes interest in the ancestral property in the family of his/her birth." The court clarified that only property already vested in the child in the family of birth would be saved by proviso (b) to Section 12. This includes property acquired through self-acquisition, will, inheritance, or as the sole surviving coparcener.

The judgment highlighted the importance of distinguishing between unspecified coparcenary interest and property already vested. It rejected the notion that an adopted child is divested of property upon adoption, criticizing the concept of adoption as civil death and a rebirth. Instead, the court affirmed that adoption is a process of transplantation into the adoptive family.

The court's ruling brings much-needed clarity to the legal status of an adopted child and the rights and obligations associated with adoption. It provides a definitive interpretation of proviso (b) to Section 12 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, resolving conflicting opinions from various high courts.

This landmark judgment by the Hyderabad High Court is expected to have a far-reaching impact on adoption-related matters across the country. It reaffirms the legal position that adoption severs ties with the family of birth, establishing the adopted child as a coparcener of the adoptive family.

Date of Decision: 27th June 2023 

Anumolu Nageswara  vs A.V.R.L.Narasimha Rao

Latest Legal News