SAHDEV SINGH Vs. LAKSHMI CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS regular second appeal is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the Additional District Judge, Gurgaon affirming that of the trial Court by which the suit of the plaintiff-respondents was partly decreed and the adoption of Sahdev Singh appellant by Tara Chand was held to be illegal and void. The Will executed by Tara Chand in favour of Sahdev Singh was also held to be invalid qua the agricultural land.

(2.) LAKSHMI Chand and Karan Singh sons of Chiranji Lal filed a suit for a declaration that the alleged adoption of Sahdev Singh son of Ganpat Ram by Tara Chand did not take place and that it was illegal and void. A further declaration was sought to the effect that the alleged Will executed by Tara Chand in favour of Sahdev Singh was also illegal, ineffective and void. Parties to the suit are high caste Hindus and they follow Mitakshara Hindu Law in matters of alienation and adoption etc. Tara Chand defendant No. 1 is the uncle of the plaintiffs and he is issueless having no son or daughter. Plaintiffs claim that on his death they are entitled to succeed to his moveable and immoveable properties including Dohli lands held by him. It is alleged that Tara Chand never adopted Sahdev Singh who is over 30 years of age and is married and has a wife and three children living. The Will executed by Tara Chand in favour of Sahdev Sipngh was also sought to be challenged on the ground that the same was illegal and void. The suit was contested by the defendants and they pleaded that they are governed by agricultural custom of Haryana in matters of adoption and alienation and that they are not governed by Hindu Law. They also pleaded that the property held by Tara Chand including the agricultural land is not ancestral. They further pleaded that Sahdev Singh had been adopted by Tara Chand on 14.1.1975 and that according to the custom a married person having children could be adopted. Sahdev Singh had also filed a separate written statement challenging the locus-standi of the plaintiffs to file the suit. He pleaded that the plaintiffs had no right to challenge his adoption or even the Will executed by Tara Chand in his favour and that even though the parties are Gaur Brahmins, they were governed by agricultural custom whereby a married man with children could be adopted. He also pleaded that he had been validly adopted by Tara Chand. Pleadings of the parties gave rise to the following issues :

(3.) AS regards the adoption of Sahdev Singh by Tara Chand, the same stands proved by the adoption deed but the courts below were right in holding that the adoption was illegal as it contravened the provision of Section 10 of the Act. Section 10 clearly postulates that a person cannot be taken in adoption if he has not completed 15 years of age unless there is a custom or usage applicable to the parties which permits persons who have completed the age of 15 years being taken in adoption. It has been concurrently found on a consideration of the evidence that the parties are governed by Hindu Law and not by agricultural custom as alleged by the defendants. The courts were, therefore, right in holding that the adoption of Sahdev Singh was illegal because he was more than 30 years of age at the time of adoption and he was a married man with a wife and three children. Thus, he could not be taken in adoption in view of Section 10 of the Act.