The Supreme Court ruled that an adopted child cannot contest transactions made by a Hindu widow before adoption. It affirmed the widow’s ownership rights under the Hindu Succession Act, validating a 2007 sale deed while voiding a 2008 gift deed due to improper execution. The court emphasized that an adopted child cannot divest prior estates.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has ruled that an adopted child cannot challenge transactions made by a Hindu widow before adoption. The decision in Sri Mahesh v. Sangram & Ors. (SLP (C) Nos. 10558-59 of 2024) reaffirmed the widow’s absolute ownership under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, granting her the right to alienate her properties independently.
The court, led by Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra, validated a 2007 sale deed executed by Parvatibai, the widow in question. However, it invalidated a 2008 gift deed due to the lack of possession delivery, an essential condition for a valid gift.
“An adopted child shall not divest any person of an estate vested in them before the adoption,”
the bench observed, emphasizing the boundaries of an adopted child’s inheritance rights under Hindu law.
The case revolved around a property dispute after the death of Bhavakanna Shahapurkar in 1982. His properties were divided between his two wives, Parvatibai and Laxmibai, under a compromise decree.
In 1994, Parvatibai adopted Sri Mahesh, who later challenged:
- A 2007 sale deed of properties (Schedule A).
- A 2008 gift deed of properties (Schedules B and C).
The trial court partially upheld Mahesh’s claims, but the Karnataka High Court reversed this decision, prompting the Supreme Court appeal.
- Adoption Rights:
The court cited Section 12(c) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, stating:
“An adopted child shall not divest any person of an estate vested in them before the adoption.” - Absolute Ownership of the Widow:
Parvatibai’s ownership under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act granted her full rights to alienate properties, independent of Mahesh’s adoption. - Validity of Transactions:
- Sale Deed (Schedule A): Found valid and binding on Mahesh as it was executed lawfully for consideration.
- Gift Deed (Schedules B and C): Declared invalid due to the absence of possession delivery and acceptance, violating the Transfer of Property Act.
The Supreme Court upheld a split ruling:
- Sale Deed (Schedule A): Valid and binding, confirming Parvatibai’s right to sell the property.
- Gift Deed (Schedules B and C): Null and void, restoring Mahesh’s rightful claim to these properties.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
