SC rejects adoption deed in property dispute, says meant to refuse girls legitimate heritage | Today news

New -Delhi: The Supreme Court refused to interfere with an order of the Allahabad High Court who threw away the acceptance of a man in a case of property dispute, saying that it was a calculated step to refuse the daughters of their legitimate heritage of their father’s estate. In the protracted legal battle, the desiner Ashok Kumar referred to his August 9, 1967 adoption deed to claim the heritage of Bhuneshwar Singh properties that two biological daughters had- Shiv Kumari Devi and Harmunia. According to the plea, Bhuneshwar Singh, a now deceased resident, adopted Ashok during a ceremony. The Supreme Court ended an end to the legal dispute, and the Supreme Court ruling did not accept the acceptance of the adoption deed, saying that compulsory conditions such as a person who adopted a child should have the consent of his wife were not followed. The Supreme Court also apologized for the delay of more than four decades when ruling the question of the validity of the adoption deed submitted in 1983. The requester Ashok Kumar claimed to have been adopted by Singh of his biological father Subedar Singh in a ceremony and that a photo was produced before the court. A Bank of Justices Surya Kant and a Kotiswar Singh rejected the plea that Kumar filed by December 11, 2024, of the Supreme Court who refused to accept the validity of the adoption of the August 9, 1967. The Supreme Court said: “After hearing the senior advocate for the petitioner and carefully investigating the material on record, we are satisfied that the adoption deed of August 9, 1967 was nothing but a calculated step to deprive Shiv Kumari and her older sister Harmunia – of their legitimate right to inherit their father’s estate.” During the hearing, Justice Surya Kant said: “We know that it is a methodology adopted in rural areas to remove the girls from legitimate heritage. We know how these adoption proceedings are carried out. The bank, in its order recently adopted, said the consolidation authorities as well as the Supreme Court have rightly discarded the said document, which has no legal holiness. The Supreme Court said: “In the above circumstances, the court believes that there is no reason to interfere with the reasoned order accepted by the Council of Revenue, as the compulsory requirements for valid adoption were not followed, therefore this written petition is rejected.” It was said that the findings returned by the Council of Revenue were in terms of earlier judgment. There is also evidence that was not contradicted that adoption were performed without the consent of the woman of the person who adopted the child. Therefore, the compulsory requirement was not fulfilled, nor did the nature of the evidence, nor a reasonable doubt that the ceremony of giving and taking was undertaken. The Supreme Court said it could be held without a doubt that the Woman of the adoptive man did not sign the deed of adoption, and that the photos also indicate that she did not participate in the ceremony. “One witness did not even identify her in photos, and the court therefore believes that the compulsory requirement that a person who adopts a child should have the consent of his wife said. The advocate for the girls argued that the deed of adoption must be proved in terms of the provisions provided by the Maintenance and Adoption Act 1956, and consent of the wife of a man who adopted a child was compulsory, and there must be proof of the ceremony of real giving and adoption. “In the present case, however, the signature of the adopted mother was not on the deed of adoption, nor was she present at the time of his registration. Adopter -father gave her permission while she was sitting in a ‘Palki’ at the time of registration,” was disputed. First published: 13 Apr 2025, 08:03 IST