Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956

30 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

LAXMIBAI (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ANR.versusBHAGWANTBUVA (DEAD) THR. LRS. & ORS.

2013 INSC 6429 January 2013Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned the adoption of an eight‑year‑old boy by Smt. Laxmibai, a female Hindu, under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. The adoption deed was executed and registered on the same day as the ceremony, and the trial court held the adoption valid. The respondents claimed a special family custom proh

PADMJA SHARMAversusRATAN LAL SHARMA

2000 INSC 16028 March 2000Case Partly allowed

The wife, a government lecturer, filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act for divorce and sought maintenance for her two minor sons under Section 125 of the CrPC and Section 26 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The Family Court granted modest maintenance and custody to the mother, which the High Court later

KIRTIKANT D. VADODARIAversusSTATE OF GUJARAT AND ANR.

1996 INSC 58526 April 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Kirtikant Vadodaria, challenged a maintenance order granted to his step‑mother, Manjulaben, under Section 125(1)(d) of the Criminal Procedure Code. The trial court, sessions court and Gujarat High Court had held that a step‑mother could claim maintenance from her step‑son. The Supreme Court examined the

SMT. VIJAYALAKASHMAMMA AND ANR.versusB.T. SHANKAR

2001 INSC 17526 March 2001Disposed off

The deceased A.T. Nanjappa Rao left two widows, a senior and a junior, and no issue. The senior widow adopted B.T. Shankar, the plaintiff, without the junior widow's consent. The junior widow contested the adoption, arguing that under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 a widow must obtain the consent of a co

STATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.versusSMT.SANTRA

2000 INSC 23424 April 2000Dismissed

Smt. Santra, a poor labourer with seven children, underwent a sterilisation operation at a government hospital under the family‑planning scheme and was issued a certificate stating the procedure was successful. She later became pregnant and gave birth to a child because only her right fallopian tube had been operated o

DHARMA SHAMRAO AGALAWEversusPANDURANG MIRAGU AGALAWE & ORS.

1988 INSC 4922 February 1988Dismissed

The case involved Dharma Agalaw, the sole surviving coparcener of a Hindu joint family, whose brother Miragu had died leaving a widow Champabai. After the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 came into force, the widow adopted Pandurang, who then claimed a one‑half share in the joint family property that had passe

MOTURU NALINI KANTHversusGAINEDI KALIPRASAD (DEAD, THROUGH LRS.)

2023 INSC 100420 November 2023Dismissed

The appellant, Moturu Nalini Kanth, filed a suit as a minor claiming absolute title to the properties of the deceased Venkubayamma based on a registered will dated 03.05.1982 and a registered adoption deed dated 20.04.1982. The trial court upheld the suit, but the Andhra Pradesh High Court reversed the decision, holdin

KASABAI TUKARAM KARVAR & ORS.versusNIVRUTI (DEAD) THROUGH LEGAL HEIRS & ORS

2022 INSC 73320 July 2022Dismissed

The father of the parties died in 1948, leaving a daughter who was born ten days later. The mother subsequently adopted a son in 1949. The daughter filed a suit for partition of the family property, claiming a share as a coparcener under the pre‑1956 Hindu law. The High Court, applying the doctrine of relation‑back, he

BALWANT KAUR AND ANR .versusCHANAN SINGH AND ORS.

2000 INSC 22518 April 2000Appeal(s) allowed

Sham Singh, the sole owner of a 47-kanal land, executed a will bequeathing two‑thirds of the property to his brothers and one‑third to his widowed daughter, Balwant Kaur, as a life interest that would revert to the brothers on her death. The daughter, a destitute dependent of her father, claimed full ownership of the o

SHRI RAM SHRIDHAR CHIMURKARversusUNION OF INDIA & ANR.

2023 INSC 4917 January 2023Dismissed

Shridhar Chimurkar, a retired government superintendent, died in 1994 leaving a widow, Maya Motghare, who adopted Sri Ram Shridhar Chimurkar in 1996, two years after the death. The appellant sought family pension under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, but the government rejected the claim on the ground

SMT. CHANDAN BILASINI (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC.versusAFTABUDDIN KHAN AND ORS. ETC.

1995 INSC 74216 November 1995Disposed off

The plaintiff, a widow, adopted Amaresh Sarkar on 24 August 1965 under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, and executed a registered deed acknowledging the adoption. The natural father later executed a deed acknowledging the adoption. The trial court held the adoption valid, but the High Court reversed, draw

RAJGOPAL (DEAD) BY LRS.versusKISHAN GOPAL AND ANR.

2003 INSC 48116 September 2003Appeal(s) allowed

The suit filed by the heirs of Rajgopal sought declaration of title and possession of joint family property, contending that the adoption of Goverdhan Das was in the 'Dwyamushyayana' form, which would preserve his inheritance rights in his natural father's estate. The trial court dismissed the suit on limitation and he

ABHILASHAversusPARKASH & ORS.

2020 INSC 54615 September 2020Dismissed

The appellant, Abhilasha, a Hindu daughter, challenged a lower court order that limited her maintenance from her father, Parkash, to the period until she attained majority, arguing that under Section 20(3) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 she could claim maintenance until she marries. The Supreme Court

SMT. P. LEELAVATHAMMAversusCONTROLLER OF ESTATE DUTY, ANDHRA PRADESH, HYDERABAD

1991 INSC 4415 February 1991Dismissed

The appellant, SMT. P. Leelavathamma, appealed against the Controller of Estate Duty challenging the computation of the net principal value of the deceased’s estate. She argued that the estate duty payable on the property passing on death constituted a first‑charge encumbrance and therefore should be deductible under S

VIMALBEN AJITBHAI PATELversusVATSLABEEN ASHOKBHAI PATEL AND ORS.

2008 INSC 36814 March 2008Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined a dispute arising from a criminal complaint filed by Sonalben against her husband and in‑laws for alleged offences under the IPC. The appellants were granted bail, left India without permission, and faced cancellation of bail, attachment of the mother‑in‑law's property under CrPC ss. 82 and 8

KANCHANA RAIversusGEETA SHARMA & ORS.

2026 INSC 5413 January 2026Dismissed

The deceased Dr. Mahendra Prasad died in 2021 leaving three sons; one son, Ranjit Sharma, died after his father’s death and his wife Geeta Sharma filed a maintenance petition under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, claiming she was a dependant. The Family Court dismissed the petition, holding she was not a

DASARI ANIL KUMAR & ANOTHERversusTHE CHILD WELFARE PROJECT DIRECTOR & OTHERS

2025 INSC 97212 August 2025Disposed off

The appellants, who had adopted four minor girls under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, had their custody seized by police on the basis of an FIR and the children were placed under the Child Welfare Project Director. The appellants challenged the police action, arguing it was illegal and violated Articles

SUKHDEV SINGHversusSUKHBIR KAUR

2025 INSC 19712 February 2025Reference answered

The case arose from a decree of nullity under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, wherein the Punjab & Haryana High Court had held the marriage void. The appellant contested whether, despite the void status, the spouse could claim permanent alimony under Section 25 and interim maintenance under Section 24 of th

SMT. CHAND DHAWANversusJAWAHARLAL DHAWAN

1993 INSC 21611 June 1993

Chand Dhawan (wife) appealed against the Punjab & Haryana High Court’s order dismissing her claim for permanent alimony under Section 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act and also setting aside the maintenance pendente lite granted under Section 24. The wife had filed a petition for permanent alimony and maintenance after a di

DINAJI AND ORS.versusDADDI AND ORS.

1989 INSC 34410 November 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The case concerned a widow, Smt. Yashoda Bai, who owned her late husband's immovable property and later adopted a son, executing an unregistered deed of adoption that purported to divest her of any right to alienate the property. She subsequently executed a registered sale deed in favour of the appellant, who sued for

TEJ BHAN (D) THROUGH LR. & ORS.versusRAM KISHAN (D) THROUGH LRS. & ORS.

2024 INSC 9459 December 2024

The appeal concerned the interpretation of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, specifically the interplay between sub‑sections (1) and (2) regarding whether a Hindu female's possession of property, whether by will, gift, or maintenance, confers absolute ownership or a restricted estate. The appellant, a purch

VIJAYA KUMARI S & ANOTHERversusUNION OF INDIA

2025 INSC 12099 October 2025Case Allowed

The petitioners, three intending couples, had completed the embryo‑freezing stage of surrogacy in 2020‑2021, before the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act, 2021 came into force on 25 January 2022. After the Act’s commencement, the statutory age limits (female ≤50, male ≤55) barred them from obtaining the eligibility certificat

SADHU SINGHversusGURDWARA SAHIB NARIKE AND ORS.

2006 INSC 5868 September 2006Appeal(s) allowed

Ralla Singh, a Hindu male, executed a will bequeathing his self‑acquired property to his wife Isher Kaur for life, with a restriction that she could not alienate the property and that after her death the two nephews would inherit. After Ralla's death, Isher Kaur gifted the property to a Gurdwara, which the nephews chal

ANANDI D. JADHAV (DEAD) BY LRS .versusNIRMALA RAM CHANDRA KORE AND ORS .

2000 INSC 1925 April 2000Dismissed

The landlord heirs of a one‑room premises filed suit for eviction of the tenant, Nirmala Ramchandra Kore, under Section 13(1)(1) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947, alleging that the tenant had alternate accommodation because her sons had built a house. The tenant contended that under

RAJNESHversusNEHA & ANR.

2020 INSC 6314 November 2020Disposed off

The husband appealed against a Family Court order granting interim maintenance of Rs 15,000 per month to his wife and Rs 10,000 per month to his son under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., which was affirmed by the Bombay High Court. The Supreme Court upheld the lower courts' orders, directed the husband to pay the full arre

RUMA CHAKRABORTYversusSUDHA RANI BANERJEE AND ANR.

2005 INSC 4754 October 2005Dismissed

The landlady filed an eviction suit against the tenant for sub‑letting without consent; the tenant had left the premises and his divorced wife, Ruma Chakraborty, remained only as custodian of their minor children. Chakraborty sought to be impleaded as a party defendant under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC, claiming a right to

LAXMI KANT PANDEYversusUNION OF INDIA

1986 INSC 2543 December 1986Disposed off

The Supreme Court entertained several criminal miscellaneous petitions filed under Article 32 seeking clarification of the procedural safeguards it had earlier laid down for the adoption of Indian children by foreign and Indian parents. It directed that reasonable remuneration, ranging from Rs. 450 to Rs. 500 (and up t

RAJENDRA KUMARversusKALYAN (DEAD) BY LRS.

2000 INSC 3702 August 2000Dismissed

The appellant Rajendra Kumar claimed possession of property left by Mohanlal, asserting that he had been adopted by Radhabai, the widow of Mahadeo, who was allegedly an adopted son of Mohanlal. The lower courts held that the adoption of a child by a widow to her deceased husband under Section 8 of the Hindu Adoptions a

RAVI SINGHAL AND ORS.versusMONALI SINGHAL AND ANR.

2001 INSC 4741 October 2001Disposed off

Ravi Singhal and his son filed a suit in the Delhi High Court seeking specific performance of a family settlement dated 4 November 1994, which required the husband to provide maintenance, a house, and other expenses for his wife and daughter. The wife and daughter obtained an interim order directing the husband to pay

SRI MAHESHversusSANGRAM & ORS

2025 INSC 141 January 2025Case Partly allowed

The appellant, an adopted son, claimed entitlement to half of his adoptive mother's joint family property and challenged two alienations— a sale deed (2007) and a gift deed (2008) executed by the adoptive mother after his adoption. The dispute hinged on whether the adoption of a widow’s son relates back to the husband'

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search