Adoption Deed Alone Not Enough; Valid Hindu Adoption Requires Proof Of 'Giving And Taking' Ceremony: Rajasthan High Court

The Rajasthan High Court has held that adoption cannot be recognized in the eye of law merely based on the strength of an executed document. It opined that the ceremony of actual giving and taking of the child concerned is a mandatory feature under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 and the same is not a mere formality.

The bench of Justice Farjand Ali was hearing challenge against a decree and order of the appellate court, that had ruled the adoption deed in question to be invalid and unenforceable in law.

It was the case of the respondent that the appellant was never adopted by her in accordance with the Hindu Customs. Rather, with an oblique motive to grab her agricultural property, the appellant's father fraudulently and deceitfully took her thumb impressions on the adoption deed, without revealing the true nature and content of the documents.

The counsel for the respondent further submitted that the appellant never resided with the respondent, neither was every maintained, nurtured or educated by her. It was argued that the appellant continued to remain under the care and custody of his biological parents.

After hearing the contentions, the Court held,

“The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 unequivocally contemplates that for a valid adoption there must be actual giving and taking of the child with an intention to transfer the child from one family to another. The ceremony of giving and taking is not a mere formality but constitutes the very essence and soul of a valid adoption.”

The Court further highlighted that the adoption deed had no recital affirming the performance of the mandatory ceremony of giving and taking of the appellant. It was observed that the document was silent on the essential customs and rituals that were indispensable for conferring legitimacy upon an adoption under Hindu Law.

As argued by the respondent, the Court also took into account that there was no evidence to establish that after the alleged adoption, the appellant was ever treated as the adopted son of the respondent in the true legal sense.

“The evidence available on record demonstrates that the appellant-defendant continued to remain under the care, custody and upbringing of his biological parents. No convincing material has been placed on record to show that the respondent plaintiff ever maintained, educated or brought up the appellant defendant as her adopted son.”

In this background, the Court concluded that both the lower courts rightly appreciated the evidence on record.

Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

Title: Hari Ram v Chunni Devi

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 191

Click Here To Read/Download Order