Court rules female child adoption not recognized under ancient Hindu law, denies inheritance rights to foster child.
In a significant ruling, the Gujarat High Court dismissed an appeal concerning the adoption of a female child under ancient Hindu law in the case of Hiruben Pparbatbhai Satasiya v. Bhagwanjibhai Popatbhai Ranparia. The court upheld the trial court's decision, which denied Hiruben Pparbatbhai Satasiya's claim as an adopted daughter of the deceased Bhovanbhai Narsibhai, thereby denying her inheritance rights over the disputed immovable properties.
The appeal, filed by Hiruben Pparbatbhai Satasiya, questioned the legality of a prior judgment by the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Dhoraji, which had dismissed her suit seeking recognition as the adopted daughter of Bhovanbhai Narsibhai. Hiruben claimed that she was adopted by Bhovanbhai after her mother, Maniben, married him following the death of her first husband. The suit sought ownership of properties owned by Bhovanbhai, alleging that a will used by the respondents to claim the properties was forged.
The high court, presided over by Justice J. C. Doshi, examined the ancient Hindu laws and customs regarding adoption. The court noted that under ancient Hindu law, as outlined in various authoritative texts, adoption was primarily for spiritual purposes and to continue the male lineage. The adoption of a female child was not recognized, as the religious and secular motives for adoption emphasized the need for a male child to perform essential rites and continue the family lineage.
The judgment delved into the historical and legal context, citing sources such as N. R. Raghavachariar's Hindu Law Principles and Precedents, Mayne's Treatise on Hindu Law and Usage, and Prof. Mulla's commentary on Hindu Law. These sources collectively confirmed that under the pre-1956 Hindu legal framework, adoption was intended only for male children.
The court further addressed the concept of an "Angaliyat" child, a custom where a child from a mother's previous union is brought into a new household. The court acknowledged that while such a child may be socially accepted as part of the family, ancient Hindu law did not grant them legal status as adopted children for inheritance purposes.
The ruling also highlighted that the plaintiff, Hiruben, had already received inheritance from her biological father, thereby excluding her from claiming inheritance rights from the adoptive family, even if she were considered an adopted child.
The court concluded that the trial court had rightly applied the doctrine of "factum valet" and dismissed the suit based on the plaintiff's failure to establish a legally recognized adoption under the applicable ancient Hindu law.
The dismissal of this appeal reinforces the legal position on adoption under ancient Hindu law, emphasizing the historical restrictions on the adoption of female children and the importance of adhering to documented legal frameworks for inheritance claims.
Bottom line:-
Hindu Law - Under ancient Hindu law, prior to the enactment of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, the adoption of a female child was not legally recognized. A child brought into a family as an "Angaliyat" child could be treated as a foster child but not as an adopted child for inheritance claims.
Statutory provision(s): Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956; Hindu Succession Act, 1956; Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908; Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
