PUTLIBAI Vs. MADHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question in this appeal is whether the plaintiff has been validly adopted as a son to his deceased maternal grandfather Sadashiv. The question has been answered in the affirmative in the lower Court.

(2.) The material facts are as follows:

(3.) The plaintiff is the natural son of Anna and Bhagi. Bhagi is the daughter of Sadashiv. Anna, Bhagi and the plaintiff lived with Sadashiv, Bhagi says that her father intended from the first to adopt the plaintiff, that her husband asked him to do so and when attacked with plague told Sadashiv that the boy was given to him. This story is highly probable for Sadashiv was a well-to-do man possessed of property worth Rs. 25,000 or Rs. 30,000 while Anna had no property whatever. At intervals of a few months the deaths occurred of, first, Anna, then, Sadashiv and lastly, Bhowani, Bhagi s mother. Sadashiv had another wife Putli, the defendant in this suit. After Sadashiv s death Putli and Bhagi and the plaintiff lived together in Sadashiv s house until they were driven out by Balu, the divided brother of Sadashiv. Balu s action led to litigation between him and Putli in which Putli eventually secured from him all Sadashiv s property. For abut 3 years Putli continued to treat the plaintiff as before as the son of Sadashiv. She also in April 1906 went through a formal adoption ceremony in which the plaintiff was given by Bhagi and taken by Putli as son to Sadashiv. A deed of adoption was then executed by Putli in the plaintiff s favour.