Customary adoption – No scope after coming into force of Act – Validity of adoption before this Act has to be determined with reference to law or custom as it stood before coming into force of the Act. AIR 1975 S.C. 784 followed. (Mohinder Singh Vs Gurbax Singh) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 07 (P&H)
Adoption – Adoption of a son where adoptive father or mother by whom the adoption is made has a Hindu son, son’s son, or son’s son’s son, whether by legitimate blood relationship or by adoption, living at the time of adoption – Where a son became a outcast or renounced Hindu religion, his father becomes entitled to adopt another. (Kashi Nath (Dead) through L.Rs. Vs Jaganath) 2004(1) Apex Court Judgments 474 (S.C.)
Adoption of son by husband without consent of wife who was alive – Adoption is not valid. (Radhey Mohan Vs State of Rajasthan) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 458 (Rajasthan)
Adoption – Consent of wife – No evidence that wife refused to give her consent for adoption by her husband – Plea that due to strained relations of husband and wife therefore consent of wife was not taken – Documentary evidence on record however not proving or establishing such plea – Adoption void ab initio and non est. (Siddaramappa Vs Smt.Gouravva) AIR 2004 Karnataka 230
Adoption – Adopted child shall not divest any person of any estate, which vested in him or her before the adoption. (Namdev Vyankat Ghadge & Anr. Vs Chandrakant Ganpat Ghadge & Ors.) 2003(1) Apex Court Judgments 566 (S.C.)
Adoption – For a valid adoption, the physical act of giving and taking is an essential requisite, a ceremony imperative in all adoptions whatever the caste – This requisite is satisfied in its essence only by the actual delivery and acceptance of the boy, even though there exists an expression of consent or an executed deed of adoption. (Senthilkumar Vs Dhandapani & Ors.) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 392 (Madras)
Adoption – Presumption as to valid adoption – Petitioner lawfully adopted by a Hindu lady and deed of adoption registered – Presumption as to valid adoption operates so long as the same is not challenged or such presumption is not rebutted by procedure known to law – Change of name based on deed of adoption notified in Govt. gazette and known to public at large – Held, adoption is valid and petitioner would be justified in getting appropriate correction in school record for change of his name. (Nayankumar Rajnikaben Trivedi Vs District Education Officer) AIR 2004 Gujarat 53
Adoption – Proof – Should be free from all suspicion of fraud and so consistent and probable as to give no occasion for doubting its truth – Fact of adoption must be proved in the same way as any other fact. (Senthilkumar Vs Dhandapani & Ors.) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 392 (Madras)
Registered deed of adoption – General presumption is that adoption has been validly made in compliance with the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 until it is disproved. (Senthilkumar Vs Dhandapani & Ors.) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 392 (Madras)
Maintenance – Interim maintenance can be granted by Family Court u/s 151 C.P.C. to wife and children in a suit for maintenance filed under Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act against husband. (P.Srinivasa Rao Vs Smt.P.Indira) AIR 2002 A.P. 130
Interim maintenance – Court can grant interim maintenance in a petition for maintenance filed u/s 18 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. (Mohini Bharat alias Seema & Anr. Vs V.K.Bharat) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 476 (P&H)
“Agreement to live separately” – Does not operate as decree of divorce dissolving marriage – Wife living separately under such agreement is entitled to claim maintenance from husband from date of institution of suit for maintenance. (Bouramma Vs Siddappa Jeevappa Patarad) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 291 (Karnataka)
Interim maintenance – Maintenance awarded u/s 125 Cr.P.C. – Interim maintenance granted taking judicial notice of award u/s 125 Cr.P.C. – Not liable to be interfered with. (V.Santhanam Vs S.Sathya) AIR 2003 Madras 94
Maintenance – Grant to wife under Act of 1956 – Wife is estopped from claiming maintenance u/s 125 Cr.P.C. (Banisdhar Mohanty Vs Jyoshnarani Mohanty) AIR 2002 Orissa 182
Maintenance – Jurisdiction – Wife apprehending danger to her life at the hands of husband and his family members left her matrimonial house at place ‘G’ – Cause of action arises at place ‘G’ – It is S.20 CPC and not S.19 Hindu Marriage Act which governs jurisdiction – Court at place ‘G’ has jurisdiction to try petition for maintenance. (Pankaj Suryakant Lohar Vs Mayuri Pankaj Lohar) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 52 (Bombay)
Maintenance – Quantum – Status of husband is determinative of quantum of maintenance to be given to wife. (Smt.Meenu Chopra Vs Deepak Chopra) AIR 2002 Delhi 131
Maintenance – Second marriage – Previous marriage not dissolved – Second wife is not entitled for maintenance. (Jayalakshmi Vs Krishna Padayachi) 2003(1) Civil Court Cases 610 (Madras)
Maintenance proceedings – No procedure is prescribed for filing a proceeding under the Act – Provisions of Code of Civil Procedure will have to be followed. (Pankaj Suryakant Lohar Vs Mayuri Pankaj Lohar) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 52 (Bombay)
Marriage during subsistence of previous marriage – Wife is not entitled to claim maintenance. (Jayalakshmi Vs Krishna Padayachi) AIR 2003 Madras 134
Wife – Right of residence – Ceases with death of wife as such right is her personal right – Legal Representatives of said wife do not have vested interest in matter. (Sheela Rani Vs Jagdish Chander Sharma) AIR 2004 Delhi 158
Maintenance – Jurisdiction – Held, proceedings for maintenance can be instituted at a place of residence of wife who is residing at different place than her husband. (Sunit W/o Ravi Sangavai Vs Ravi ) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 664 (Bombay)
Maintenance – Failure to prove status as wife – Living together for a year does not confer the status of a legally married wife – Held, petitioner is not entitled to maintenance. (Smt.Parbati Giri Vs Sri Harihar Giri) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 211 (Orissa)
Interim maintenance – Marriage during subsistence of first marriage – Hit by S.5 – Not a Hindu wife within meaning of S.15 – Not entitled to maintenance – Also not entitled to interim maintenance during pendency of proceedings. (Suresh Khullar Vs Vijay Khullar) AIR 2002 Delhi 373
Maintenance – Jurisdiction – Wife and daughter, due to circumstances, leaving matrimonial house and residing with her father – Place where wife resides with her father has jurisdiction to try the petition. (Mrs.Sucheta Dilip Ghate Vs Dilip Shantaram Ghate) AIR 2003 Bombay 390
Interim maintenance – Can be granted. (V.Santhanam Vs S.Sathya) AIR 2003 Madras 94
Interim maintenance during pendency of application seeking permission to sue in forma pauperis – Can be granted – The moment an application in forma pauperis is presented it is commencement of the suit. (Balbir Kumar Vs Anita Rani) 2004(2) Civil Court Cases 25 (P&H)
Maintenance – Claim by wife and children – Court fee – Proceedings before Family Court is not a suit – All the petitions in the Family Courts are in the nature of petitions or application – Ad valorem Court fee is not payable. (Mamta Vs Hari Kishan) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 267 (Rajasthan)
Maintenance – Paternity of child disputed – Court has power to order a person to undergo DNA test – DNA test is scientifically accurate. (Bommi & Anr. Vs Munirathinam) 2004(3) Civil Court Cases 276 (Madras)
Maintenance – Wife and children – Wife is entitled to live separately if husband makes unfounded allegations of unchastity against her – Father cannot escape liability to maintain children by simply making a statement that he was ready to maintain them without making attempts to get custody of children living with mother. (S.Yellamma Vs S.Anjaneyulu) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 211 (A.P.)
Maintenance – Enforcement against transferee of property – Can be enforced only when transferee has notice of such right. (Kangal Vs Smt.Atwariya Devi) AIR 2002 All. 77
Interim maintenance – Can be granted during the pendency of petition for maintenance under S.19 of the Act. (Charanjit Kaur & Anr. Vs Darshan Singh) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 347 (P&H)
Interim maintenance – Plaintiff is not required to plead in negative that she has not inherited any property of her father – It is for the defendant to plead and prove that plaintiff is not an indigent person and has inherited property – Plaintiff cannot be non suited to claim interim maintenance on the ground of not pleading that she has not inherited the estate of her father. (Charanjit Kaur & Anr. Vs Darshan Singh) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 347 (P&H)
Maintenance – Widowed daughter-in-law – She is entitled to claim maintenance against the self-acquired property of her father-in-law, whether it is in his hand or in the hand of his heir or donee – Maintenance includes provision for food and clothing and like and take into account the basic need of a roof over the head. (Balbir Kaur Vs Harinder Kaur) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 80 (P&H)
Maintenance – Unmarried daughter – Right to claim maintenance from father continues even after she attains majority until she gets married if she is unable to maintain herself out of her own earnings or property. (Viswambharan Vs Dhanya) 2005(2) Civil Court Cases 412 (Kerala)
Marriage of daughter – Expenses – Marriage performed during pendency of appeal by wife – Nothing to show that husband performed marriage himself spending amount – By mere mentioning of the name of husband in the invitation cards, he cannot take advantage of the same and contend that he performed the marriage – Wife held is entitled to claim marriage expenses spent by her from husband. (S.Yellamma Vs S.Anjaneyulu) 2003(3) Civil Court Cases 211 (A.P.)
Daughter – Can claim maintenance from her father even after attaining majority if she is unmarried and so long she is not in a position to maintain herself out of her own earing and property – The burden is on father to point out that she is in a position to maintain herself. (Mansi Vs Aniruddha Ramchandra Pusalkar) 2003(2) Civil Court Cases 145 (Bombay)
Son – Grant of interim maintenance and subjecting father to DNA test – Plaintiff claimed to be son born as a result of marriage of his mother with defendant – Defendant however filed documents showing marriage of plaintiff’s mother with some other person – Not disputed by plaintiff – Raising doubt on conduct and credibility of plaintiff’s mother – Similarly transcript of tap recorded conversation purporting to be between plaintiff’s mother and colleague of defendant discussing relationship of parties and about custody of plaintiff – Cannot establish plaintiff’s case without veracity of conversation being established – No prima facie case made out either for interim direction for DNA test or for grant of interim maintenance. (Master ‘X’ Vs ‘Y’). AIR 2003 Delhi 195