Madras High Court: In a writ petition filed against the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer (‘RDO’), wherein it cancelled the relationship certificate issued by the Tahsildar, and remitted back for fresh enquiry, G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J. has said that upon adoption ties with the biological family are legally severed and therefore, by operation of law, no person from the biological family of adoptive child could have any connection or claim over any of his properties which devolved upon him in the adoptive family. Thus, the Court set aside the impugned order as it is in contravention of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (‘HAMA’).
Background:
In the present case, the petitioner’s grandfather had three children, the petitioner’s uncle had no children, thus he adopted a child. Thereafter, the uncle and aunt died leaving behind their sole legal heir. The said legal heir (adopted child) also died leaving behind no legal heirs of the first class as per the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. However, the said adopted child had two biological sisters and one brother. As, the uncle had one brother and one sister, who had children of their own, they were class II legal heirs of the deceased uncle as per Hindu Succession Act, 1956. Therefore, they had applied for legal heirship certificate before the Tahsildar. After due enquiry, the Tahsildar had issued legal heirship certificate in their favour. Aggrieved, respondents 6 to 8 preferred an appeal before the RDO. Thus, the RDO after taking note of that the adoption deed is registered and that after the demise of adopted son, his siblings were included as legal heirs in the legal heirship certificate, has set aside the legal heirship certificate issued by the Tahsildar. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed the present petition, praying for quashing the impugned order and to direct the Tahsildar to issue the certificate that was previously issued and declare the petitioner and respondents as the legal heirs.
Analysis and decision:
After perusing Section 12 of HAMA, the Court said that on the date of adoption the ties of the adoptive child in the family of his or her birth shall be deemed to be severed and replaced by those created by the adoption in the adoptive family.
The Court said that the adoptive child is construed to be a member of the adopted family, all the ties of the child are replaced in the adoptive family created by adoption.
Therefore, the Court said that the order passed by the RDO is in contravention of Section 12 of HAMA. Therefore, the Court set aside the impugned order.
[V.Sakthivel v. Revenue Divisional Officer, 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 2464, Order dated: 05-06-2024]