SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sri.Pramod.N.K vs Ms.Rakshitha on 25 March, 2017

Govt.of Karnataka TITLE SHEET FOR JUDGMENT IN SUITS

From No.9(Civil)
Title Sheet for
Judgment in suits
(R.P.91)

IN THE COURT OF THE VI ADDL. CITY CIVIL SESSIONS JUDGE
AT BENGALURU CITY : (CCCH.11)

Dated this the 25th day of March, 2017

PRESENT: Sri.K.M.Rajashekar, B.Sc., LL.B.,
(Name of the Presiding Judge)

O.S.No :10160/2015

PLAINTIFFS : 1) SRI.PRAMOD.N.K
S/o.late Sri.N.S.Krishna Murthy,
Aged about 38 years,
R/o Sri Ganesh Krupa,
Near Eshwari English School,
Hosakerehalli, Banashankari III Stage,
Bengaluru – 560 085.

2) SMT.USHA.C.S
W/o.Sri.Pramod.N.K
D/o.late Sri.C.H.Sheshappa,
Aged about 34 years,
R/o Sri Ganesh Krupa,
Near Eshwari English School,
Hosakerehalli, Banashankari III Stage,
Bengaluru – 560 085.

(By Pleader Sri.Vasudeva Iyengar.K.T)
2 OS.NO:10160/2015

-VS-

DEFENDANT : Ms.Rakshitha,
D/o.Sri.Venkatesh,
Aged about 19 years,
R/at Harohalli, Kanakapura Taluk.

:Also at:

No.159, Andrahalli Main Road,
1st Cross, Friends Colony,
Bengaluru-560 091.

(Exparte)

Date of Institution of the suit : 14.12.2015

Nature of the Suit : Declaration Injunction

Date of commencement of recording
of evidence : 22.09.2016

Date on which the Judgment was
pronounced : 25.03.2017

Year/s Month/s Day/s
Total Duration : 01 03 11

(K.M.RAJASHEKAR)
VI ADDL.CITY CIVIL SESSIONS JUDGE
BENGALURU CITY
3 OS.NO:10160/2015

JUDGMENT

The Plaintiffs have got filed this suit for

declaration that they are the father and mother of male

child in terms of the registered Adoption Deed dated

09.09.2015; for declaration that the natural mother

Smt.Rakshitha being isolated woman alone has the right

to give the male child in adoption; and for restraining

anybody claiming right over male child in any manner

from up bringing by the Plaintiffs.

2) In nutshell Plaintiffs case is that, Plaintiffs are

husband and wife. The Defendant Ms.Rakshitha, being

an isolated woman had given birth to a male child on

02.09.2015 at Vanivilas Hospital, Bengaluru, she cannot

up bring the child properly, and hence, she proposed to

give her male child on adoption to the Plaintiffs. The

Plaintiffs have no issues and on account of advanced

age they have no expectation of having any issue in

future, hence they entered into the registered Adoption

Deed dated 09.09.2015 for getting the male child in
4 OS.NO:10160/2015

adoption from Ms.Rakshitha and they have also

performed ‘DATTAKA HOMAM’ for the said adoption.

Plaintiff No.1 is working in Medical Company and

Plaintiff No.2 is working as Teacher in Private school in

Bengaluru and they are having an income of R.40,000/-

per month and they have decided to give bright future

to the male child, further they are unaware of the father

of the child and his identity since the mother of the child

has been cheated and impregnated by unknown man

and she is not in a position to disclose the name of that

person. Under the pathetic situation, sorrowful and

helpless plight of the Defendant Ms.Rakshitha, Plaintiffs

accepted the child in adoption and though accepted to

go in for adoption felt it necessary to legalize the

adoption to avoid further litigation and disputes either

from the Defendant or from unknown natural father of

the child or anybody claiming through or on behalf of

them, hence, this suit for the aforesaid reliefs.

5 OS.NO:10160/2015

3) Notice of this suit is duly published in the

newspaper. Neither the Defendant nor any of the

parties appeared before Court to contest the case,

accordingly, the Defendant has been placed exparte.

4) In support of the case, the 1st Plaintiff got

examined himself as P.W.1 and got marked Exs.P.1 to

P.5.

5) Heard. Perused the records.

6) The point that arises for my consideration is :

” Whether the Plaintiffs are entitled to
the reliefs sought for?”

7) My answer to the above point is in the

affirmative for the following :

REASONS

8) Upon perusal of the materials available on record,

it is seen that the Plaintiffs have come up with this suit
6 OS.NO:10160/2015

for declaration that they are the father and mother of

male child in terms of the registered Adoption Deed

dated 09.09.2015; and that the natural mother

Smt.Rakshitha being isolated woman alone has the right

to give the male child in adoption; and for restraining

anybody claiming right over male child in any manner

from up bringing by them on the ground that, they

being husband and wife are issueless and on account of

advanced age, they have no expectation of having any

issue in future, so they agreed to the proposal made by

the Defendant Ms.Rakshitha to given in adoption her

male child born on 02.09.2015 at Vanivilas Hospital,

Bengaluru due to her isolation and not in a position to

up bring the child properly and entered into the

registered Adoption Deed dated 09.09.2015 and also

performed ‘DATTAKA HOMAM’ for the said adoption.

Plaintiff No.1 is working in Medical Instrument Company

and Plaintiff No.2 is working as Teacher in Private school

in Bengaluru and they have an income of R.40,000/- per
7 OS.NO:10160/2015

month and have decided to give bright future to the

male child and though accepted to go in for adoption

felt it necessary to legalize the adoption to avoid further

litigation and disputes either from the Defendant or

from unknown natural father of the child or anybody

claiming through or on behalf of them etc.

9) In order to support the case, the 1st Plaintiff

Sri.Pramod.N.K got examined himself as P.W.1, who has

reiterated the plaint averments on oath and got marked

Exs.P.1 to P.5 viz., OPD book of Vani Vilas Hospital,

Discharge cum Identity Card of Ms.Rakshitha, Marriage

Registration Certificate, registered Deed of Adoption

dated 09.09.2015 and affidavit of one

Smt.Parvathamma.

10) At this stage, it is relevant to mention the

provisions of Section 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and

Maintenance Act, 1956 which reads thus :

8 OS.NO:10160/2015

” 16. Presumption as to registered
documents relating to adoption.-

Whenever any document registered under
any law for the time being in force is produced
before any court purporting to record an
adoption made and is signed by the person
giving and the person taking the child in
adoption, the court shall presume that the
adoption has been made in compliance with
the provisions of this Act unless and until it is
disproved. ”

11) Upon going through the registered Instrument

which is marked as Ex.P.4 in this case, it indicates that

one Ms.Rakshitha who is the mother of the male child

has given in adoption the child to the Plaintiffs herein.

The said registered instrument is executed before the

Sub-Registrar, Bengaluru and witnessed by two of the

attesting witnesses. The notice of this suit is duly

notified in paper publication. Neither the mother of the

adopted child nor any third party has approached the

court to counter the claim of the Plaintiffs. The hospital

documents got placed by the Plaintiffs herein clearly

indicates that the adoptive child belongs to the

Defendant Ms.Rakshitha. Under the facts and

circumstances of this case and keeping in view of
9 OS.NO:10160/2015

Section 16 of the Adoption and Maintenance Act, I am

of the opinion that when the document registered as

required under law is placed before this court as per

Ex.P.4 regarding adoption and that Adoption Deed is

signed by the mother of the adoptive child and the

Plaintiffs herein who have taken the child on adoption,

presumption follows that ‘Whenever any document

registered under any law for the time being in force is

produced before any court purporting to record an

adoption made and is signed by the person giving and

the person taking the child in adoption, the court shall

presume that the adoption has been made in

compliance with the provisions of this Act unless and

until it is disproved.’ ‘Hence, absolutely there are no

hurdles to hold that the adoption made under the

registered instrument has been done in compliance with

the provisions of this Act as the contrary is not proved

by any of the party. Added to that, their Lordships of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the decision reported in
10 OS.NO:10160/2015

(1998) 8 SCC 701 in the case of MST.DEU AND OTHERS

VS. LAXMI NARAYAN AND others have held that :

” Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Or.22 Rr.5
and 2 – Partition suit – Plaintiff dying – L,
alleging himself to be the adopted son of the
Plaintiff on the basis of a registered deed of
adoption, seeking substitution – Determination of
the correctness of L’s allegation – Procedure – In
such circumstances, in view of S.16 of Hindu
Adoptions and Maintenance Act, held, the trial
court rightly directed L to be substituted in place
of the Plaintiff – ”

In the absence of any materials to prove contrary to the

claim of the Plaintiffs, that too in the back ground of

Plaintiffs claim is armored with the registered

instrument, I am of the opinion that absolutely there are

no reasons to disbelieve the claim of the Plaintiffs,

accordingly, I answer the above point in the affirmative

and proceed to pass the following :

ORDER

The suit of the Plaintiffs is hereby
decreed as prayed for.

(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed and computerized by
her, transcript thereof corrected and then pronounced by me in open
Court, dated this the 25th March, 2017.)

(K.M.RAJASHEKAR)
VI Addl.City Civil Sessions Judge
Bengaluru City.

11 OS.NO:10160/2015

ANNEXURE

I. List of witnesses examined on behalf of :

(a) Plaintiffs side :

P.W.1 – Sri.Pramod.N.K dtd.22.09.2016

(b) Defendant’s side : N I L

II. List of documents exhibited on behalf of :

(a) Plaintiffs side :

Ex.P.1 – OPD Book of Vani Vilas Hospital
Ex.P.2 – Discharge cum Identity Card of Ms.Rakshitha
Ex.P.3 – Marriage Registration Certificate of Plaintiffs
Ex.P.4 – Registered Deed of Adoption dtd.09.09.2015
Ex.P.5 – Affidavit of Smt.Parvathamma

(b) Defendant’s side : N I L

VI Addl.City Civil Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation