In Brief
The Appellant sought a declaration that she was the legally adopted daughter of the Respondent and her late husband (a retired electricity board employee), and claimed a partition share of his estate. Though the Appellant presented substantial evidence—including school and government records, nomination in pension documents, and testimony that she was brought up as their daughter—the trial court and High Court dismissed her suit. The Supreme Court upheld the dismissal, holding that valid adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act 1956 requires strict compliance with statutory requirements, including the wife's consent and proof of an actual adoption ceremony. Circumstantial evidence and de facto family treatment, however strong, cannot substitute for compliance with these mandatory statutory provisions. The appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.