Madras High Court (R. Sakthivel, J.) dismissed S.A.No.563 of 2018 filed by the biological parents (C. Subramanian and S. Meenachi) challenging the adoption of their third child, Rajasekar (born April 20, 2004), by the defendant couple (married 1993 and issueless; the 1st defendant being maternal uncle of the 2nd plaintiff). Adoption ceremony was performed on August 30, 2004 at Padaleeswarar Temple, Cuddalore per Hindu customs; registered Adoption Deed (Ex-A.1) was executed April 20, 2005, followed by a Gift Settlement Deed (Ex-B.2) on July 4, 2005 in the child's favour. Held: (i) cumulative evidence of P.W.1–P.W.6 and D.W.3 clinchingly proves the adoption and execution of Ex-A.1; (ii) onus to prove alleged signing under compulsion lay on the plaintiffs and was not discharged; (iii) the registered deed attracts the rebuttable presumption under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, which the plaintiffs' evidence failed to rebut; (iv) the chief affidavit of the plaintiffs' late father (D.W.4) is admissible and supports the defendants; (v) the adoptive father's subsequent extra-marital conduct cannot invalidate a valid adoption; (vi) the Suit, filed eight years after the adoption, is barred under Article 57 of the Limitation Act, 1963; and (vii) no question of law, much less a substantial question of law, arose. The concurrent findings of the Principal District Munsif, Thirukoilur (O.S.No.152 of 2013, decree February 3, 2016) and the II Additional Subordinate Judge, Villupuram (A.S.No.42 of 2016, judgment December 8, 2017) were left undisturbed. Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs considering the family relationship; connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition closed.
