New Delhi:The Supreme Court refused to interfere with the order of the High Court in Allahabad, which in the event of a dispute over the property threw away the adoption list of man and stated that this is a calculated step that denies their daughters their legitimate legacy of their father’s property.
In the lengthy legal battle, the proposer Ashok Kumar mentioned his adoption list 9. August 1967 to claim the inheritance of Bhuneshware Singho, who had two biological daughters Kumari Devi and Harmunia.
The application claimed that Bhuneshwar Singh, now an expired resident, accepted Ashok to the ceremony.
Also read | Shocker UP Shocker: Real Estate Seller, Partner Strength Woman to Drink Alcohol, Kill her
The Supreme Court, which ended the legal dispute, confirmed the judgment of the High Court that it did not come to the adoption document, with the compulsory conditions, such as that the person who must have the approval of his wife, was not observed.
The validity of an adoption act
The High Court also apologized for the delay of more than four decades in deciding on the issue of the validity of the adoption list filed in 1983.
The petitioner Ashok Kumar claimed that Singh received him from his biological father Subedar Singh at the ceremony and photographs were created in court.
The bench of Judge Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh rejected the action filed by Kumar against the 11th December 2024, a regulation of the High Court, which refused to accept the validity of 9 August 1967, an adoption list.
The Supreme Court said, “After heard a higher consultant for the petitioners in considerable length and carefully inspecting the recorded material, we are satisfied that the adoption list of 9 August 1967 was nothing but the calculated step to deprive Shiv Kumari and her older sister Harmania. ”
Also read | Shocking! The woman caught on video biting and beating older mothers over property
During the hearing of Judge Surya Kant, Kant said, “We know it is a methodology adopted in rural areas that released daughters from a legitimate heritage. We know how this adoption proceedings are done.
The bench recently stated that the consolidation authorities and the High Court correctly discarded the document that has no legal sanctity.
The High Court stated: “In the above -mentioned circumstances, the court is considered to be the opinion that there is no reason to interfere with the justified order adopted by the income Council, because the compulsory requirements for valid acceptance were not observed, so this written proposal is rejected.”
He said that the findings returned by the income council are in terms of earlier judgments. There are also evidence that was not contrary to the adoption procedure was carried out without the consent of the person who adopted the child.
Therefore, the mandatory requirement was not met, and the nature of the evidence was undoubtedly no doubt that the ceremony of giving and receiving was carried out.
The High Court said that it could undoubtedly decide that the wife of an adoptive man had not signed an adoption list, as well as photographs also indicate that she did not participate in the ceremony.
“One witness did not identify her in the photographs, so the court is considered to be the opinion that the compulsory requirement that a person who must have an adoptive child to have his wife’s consent,” he said.
Counseling for daughters claimed that the adoption list must be proven in terms of the provisions stipulated under the Maintenance Act and adoption of 1956 and the approval of the wife of the man who adopts the child, was compulsory and there must be evidence of the ceremony of real giving and accepting.
“In the present case, however, the signature of the adopted mother was neither on the adoption list nor was it present at the time of its registration. Addowter’s father gave his consent, while at the time of registration he was sitting in“ Palki ”,” he said.
(Tagstotranslate) Supreme Court (T) Disputes of Property (T) Adoption of the Charter (T) Allahabad High Court
