Adoption deed
vinod bansal
(Querist) 05 October 2008
This query is : Resolved
Sir
is it mandatory to register a adoptioon deed i mean adoption deed is a compulsory registrable document or not? secondery is it sufficient to attested a adoption deed by a notary public.
SANJAY DIXIT
(Expert) 05 October 2008
Dear Vinod,
In my opinion it is not mandatory to register a deed of adoption and it is fully sufficient to attest the same from a Notary Public.
But, I have a suggestion that the child going to be adopted should get recognition, so the adoption deed should be registered. It also helps in future consequences.
In case you are not from India, apart from obtaining such certificate from your country of residence, you shall also have to obtain the permission of the court to adopt the child.
Srinivas.B.S.S.T
(Expert) 05 October 2008
If by way of the adoption, the adoptive parent sought to divest herself some immovable property in favour of the adopted son then registration of the deed is necessary. AIR 1990 SC 1153.
However it is also opined in AIR 1993 AP 336 that "when adoption document is registered it is presumed that adoption was made in compliance of provisions of act unless disproved.
Sections 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 and 11 of The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act gives details of the conditions of the valid adoption.
A giving and taking cermony of the child has to be performed and in the event of absence of a registered adoption deed the occurance of such cermony shall be proved before the court.
a mere attested adoption deed cannot be looked into and the same is not admissible as evidence.
In AIR 2000 All. 166 it is held that unregistered document of adoption not admissible in evidence to prove adoption.
Hope this cleared your doubt. Regards Srinivas BSST
Adv.Shine Thomas
(Expert) 06 October 2008
Dear Srinivas,
Thanks for valuable information.
ARVIND JAIN
(Expert) 06 October 2008
NOT MANDATORY BUT SHOULD BE REGD TO AVOID FUTURE LITIGATION.
Guest
(Expert) 07 October 2008
It is a mandatory practice in Karnataka. Most lawyers get adoptions registered.
Murali Krishna
(Expert) 07 October 2008
Registration of deed of adoption is not mandatory under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, or even under Registration Act. What is mandatory under Registration Act is an authority to give in adoption.
For that matter, under HA&M Act, only proof of giving and taking is necessary and not even a deed.
Hari Mehar
(Expert) 17 August 2012
Adoption deed shall be registered compulsorily. Otherwise the adoption will not have any affect as per section 49 (2) of Registration Act. Adoption without deed may be proved with substantial evidence.
Hari Mehar, advocate: Ph. 9246625646
Rohit Krishan Naagpal
(Expert) 26 March 2020
Section 16 Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act provides presumption to the registered Deed of Adoption.
1. Madhusudan Das Vs Smt Naryani Bai & ORs AIR 1983 SC 114
2. in Mst. Deu & Ors. v. Laxmi Narayan & Ors., (1998)8 SCC 701, the presumption of registered documents under Section 16 of the Act was discussed. It was held that in view of Section 16, wherever any document registered under any law is produced before any court purporting to record an adoption made, and the same is signed by the persons mentioned therein, the court shall presume that the said adoption has been made in compliance with the provisions of the Act, until and unless such presumption is disproved. It was further held, that in view of Section 16 it is open for a party to attempt to disprove the deed of adoption by initiating independent proceedings.
This judgment has been followed by the court in subsequent judgments i.e. in the case of Mohar Ram vs. Bhim Singh, 2018(1) PLR 519 and Sube Singh vs. Parveen @ Manjeet and others. 2017(3) R.C.R.(Civil) 1022.
Mahadev v. Bainabai AIR 1975 Karnataka 79
Likewise in (2009) 13 SCC 600 (State of Chhattisgarh v. Dhirjo Kumar Sengar) it has been observed in paragraphs 14, 15 & 16 as follows:-
"14. The purported deed of adoption was not a registered one. It, therefore, did not carry with it a presumption as envisaged under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The adoption was purported to have been recorded on a stamp paper of Rs 2.
further Regarding the presumption under section 16 of the Act, a decision reported in AIR 1982 Orissa 114 (Krushna Chandra Sahu and another vs Pradipta Das and Others), wherein the High Court of Orissa has held as follows:
"4.... Therefore, no presumption can be drawn under S.16 of the Act as regards giving in adoption by the natural father. It, therefore, follows that the defendants have failed to establish their claim of adoption. Another staggering feature of the case is that admittedly no consent of Gitarani, the wife of Debendranath was taken for the alleged adoption. S.6 of the Act provides that no adoption shall be valid unless it be made in accordance with the other conditions mentioned in the Chapter. According to the proviso toS.7 of the Act if the person taking the son in adoption has a wife living, he shall not adopt except with the consent of his wife unless the wife 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. In the instant case, it is nobody's case that gitarani has 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. Thus even if there was an adoption it is invalid due to non-compliance with the requirements of the proviso to S.7".
Decision reported in (1999) 5 SCC 673 (Chairman Bihar Rajya Vidyut Board vs Chhathu Ram and Others) for the same preposition.
