DANIRAIJI VRAJLALJI JUNAGADH Vs. VAHUJI MAHARAJ SHRI CHANDRAPRABHA WIDOW OF DECEASED MAHARAJ SHRI PURSHOTTAMLALJI RAGHUNATHLALJI JUNAGADH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question is, whether an adoption made in "Goda Datta. form, a customary mode of adoption, before the passing of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (hereinafter. called the 'Act,), could be cancelled or revoked after its commencement.

(2.) The relevant provisions of the Act have been considered in the judgment of my learned brother Untwalia, J. and he has come to the conclusion that the custom of Goda Datta adoption has been abrogated by Section 4 (1) read with Section 5 of the Act, and that Section 30 saves only the validity and effect of adoption made before the Act. I agree with these conclusions. I will also assume that Section 15 deals only with cancellation of adoption made after the Act. Even so, I can not agree with his ultimate conclusion that the adoption made in the instant case could be cancelled after the Act came into force.

(3.) Since the custom of adoption in Goda Datta form has been abrogated by virtue of Section 4 (1) read with Section 5 of the Act, I do not think that the custom to cancel or revoke an adoption in that form could continue after the commencement of the Act. It is difficult to think how a custom of revoking an adoption in Goda Datta form could continue in force after the custom of making adoption in that form has been abrogated by the Act. The continuance of the custom of cancellation of Goda Datta adoption was dependent upon the continuance of the custom of making adoption in that form. With the arbrogation of the custom of adoption in that form by Section 4 (1) read with Section 5 of the Act, the custom of cancellation also stood abrogated. I cannot understand how one limb of that custom could survive the destruction of the other as both the customs were inseparably intertwined.