PATHIVADA RAMASWAMI Vs. KORDA SURYA PRAKASA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. M. S. Ramachandra Rao relies upon a decision reported in G. Rama Rao alias V. D. Rama Rao v. V. Atchut-amma, (1971) II An WR 60 interpreting the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act and contends that where the natural father of the adopted child did not speak about the giving and taking, merely relying upon registered document arid adoption is not proved as a valid adoption. On this ground he prays that the C.R.P. should be admitted as the Court committed a mistake. A perusal of the decision reported in G. Rama Rao alias Vadaga Rama Rao v. Vadaga Atchutamma (supra) contains the following passage :

(2.) In the decision relied on by the learned counsel for the" petitioner, his Lordship did not give significance to the words in the statute that "whenever a registered document of adoption is produced the Court/shall presume that the adoption has been made in compliance with the provisions of the Act. I am of the humble opinion that the law laid down in that decision is not a correct interpretation of S. 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. It is contrary to the provisions of the statute. In this view of the matter, the present C.R.P. is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed.

(3.) Revision dismissed.