Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from a suit filed by the respondent, a widow, seeking a declaration that the appellant was not her adopted son. The appellant claimed that he had been adopted by the respondent in 1956, before the commencement of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, in the customary 'Goda Datta' form. While the suit was pending, the respondent executed a written declaration stating that the adoption had never taken place and, alternatively, that if it was believed to have taken place, it stood revoked by that document. The trial court decreed the suit in favour of the respondent, and the Gujarat High Court confirmed the decree. The appellant then appealed to the Supreme Court. The central legal issue was whether a Goda Datta adoption made before the Act could be cancelled after the Act came into force. The appellant argued that Section 4(a) of the Act abrogated the custom of Goda Datta adoption, including its revocability, and that Section 15 prohibited cancellation of any valid adoption; Section 30 only saved the validity and effect of pre-Act adoptions, not the custom of revocation. The respondent contended that Section 15 applied only to adoptions made after the Act, and that the custom of revocability continued to operate for pre-Act adoptions. The Supreme Court, by majority (Bhagwati and Untwalia JJ; Mathew J dissenting), dismissed the appeal. The majority held that Section 30 of the Act is a saving clause which provides that nothing in the Act shall affect any adoption made before its commencement; the word 'affect' means 'touch', 'relate to', or 'concern', so all provisions, including Section 15, are excluded from application to pre-Act adoptions. Section 15 was interpreted to apply only to adoptions validly made after the commencement of the Act. Section 4(a) was held to be prospective; it abrogated the custom of making Goda Datta adoptions after the Act but did not destroy the second limb of the custom—revocability—for adoptions already made before the Act. The court reasoned that the custom had two limbs: one relating to making an adoption and the other providing for its revocability; the second limb could operate independently on pre-Act adoptions. Consequently, the respondent's written declaration validly revoked the adoption. The dissenting judge, Mathew J., opined that the custom of Goda Datta adoption had been abrogated by Section 4(1) read with Section 5, and the custom of cancellation could not survive independently; Section 30 saved only validity and effect, not the incident of revocability, and the maxim expressio facit cessare tacitum applied. The final decision was that the appeal was dismissed, the respondent's revocation was upheld, and the appellant was declared not to be the adopted son of the respondent.
Headnote
A) Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act - Saving Clause - Section 30 - The expression 'affect any adoption' in Section 30 excludes applicability of all provisions of the Act to adoptions made before commencement, including Section 15; the second part is ex abundanti cautela - Held that nothing contained in the Act shall touch or apply to an adoption made prior to the commencement of the Act. B) Customary Law - Revocability of Goda Datta Adoption - Sections 4(a), 15, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 - Section 15 applies only to adoptions made after commencement of the Act, therefore the custom of revocability continued in force for pre-Act adoptions; Section 4(a) did not abrogate the second limb of the custom for such adoptions - Held that cancellation of pre-Act Goda Datta adoption was valid. C) Statutory Interpretation - Prospective and Retrospective Operation - Sections 4, 5, 15, 30, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 - Section 4 is clearly prospective and not retrospective; no Goda Datta adoption could be made after the Act, hence no question of revocation for post-Act adoptions; Section 15 not retrospective, so pre-Act adoption remained revocable under custom - Held no violation of Section 15. D) Customary Practice - Two Limbs of Goda Datta Adoption - Making and Revocation - Sections 4(a), 5, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 - The first limb relating to making adoption ceased after Act, but the second limb relating to revocability survived for adoptions already made before Act; second limb could operate independently in relation to such adoptions - Held that custom of cancellation continued for pre-Act adoptions. E) Hindu Law - Revocation of Adoption - No Reasonable Grounds Required - Custom of Goda Datta revocation - No reason was necessary to be stated or proved to sustain revocation; deed of cancellation stating that if believed adopted, then cancelling, legally revoked the adoption - Held that respondent's written declaration validly revoked the adoption. F) Dissenting Opinion - Mathew J. - Sections 4(1), 5, 30, 15, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 - Custom of Goda Datta adoption abrogated; continuance of custom of cancellation dependent on continuance of custom of making adoption; Section 30 saves only validity and effect, not revocability; expression facit cessare tacitum - Held that pre-Act Goda Datta adoption could not be cancelled after commencement of Act.
Issue of Consideration
Whether an adoption made in Goda Datta form, a customary mode of adoption, before the commencement of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, could be cancelled or revoked after its commencement.
Final Decision
Supreme Court dismissed the appeal by majority (Bhagwati and Untwalia JJ; Mathew J dissenting). It held that an adoption in Goda Datta form made before the commencement of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 could be cancelled after the Act came into force. The respondent's written declaration revoking the adoption was valid, and the appellant was declared not to be the adopted son of the respondent.
Law Points
- Section 30 of Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act
- 1956 saves pre-commencement adoptions and excludes applicability of all Act provisions including Section 15
- Section 15 applies only to adoptions made after commencement of Act
- custom of revocability of Goda Datta adoption continues for pre-Act adoptions despite Section 4(a)
- Section 4 is prospective and does not abrogate second limb of custom for pre-Act adoptions
- no reasonable grounds required for revocation under custom
- written deed of cancellation validly revokes pre-Act Goda Datta adoption.
