Madras High Court Allows Writ Petition of Adopted Daughter Against Cooperative Bank for Release of Pledged Jewels — Adoption Deed Raises Presumption of Validity Under Section 16 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, and Adopted Daughter is Class I Heir Entitled to Repay Loan and Redeem Pledge.

High Court: Madras High Court In Favour of Prosecution
  • 4
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, P.G. Monika, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of mandamus directing the first and second respondents, the Kancheepuram Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., to accept the entire outstanding amount in two jewel loan accounts (Nos. 719385122 and 719670243) standing in the name of late P. Govindasamy and to hand over the pledged jewels to her. The petitioner claimed to be the adopted daughter of P. Govindasamy and Mary Stella, who had no biological children. The couple had earlier taken the third respondent, P.G. Santhosh, as a foster child through a guardianship order dated 22.03.1990 in O.P.No.82 of 1990. The petitioner was adopted by a registered adoption deed dated 24.08.2007. After the death of P. Govindasamy, the petitioner sought to repay the loans and retrieve the jewels, but the bank refused, citing a dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent. The court examined the validity of the adoption and guardianship, and held that the adoption deed raises a presumption of valid adoption under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. The court also noted that the third respondent was only a guardian ward, not an adopted son, and thus the petitioner, as the adopted daughter, is a Class I heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. The court directed the bank to accept the repayment from the petitioner and release the pledged jewels, subject to the petitioner furnishing an indemnity bond and an undertaking to produce succession certificate if required. The court also directed the third respondent to cooperate and not obstruct the process.

Headnote

A) Adoption - Validity of Adoption Deed - Section 16 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 - Presumption of valid adoption arises from registered adoption deed - Court held that the adoption deed dated 24.08.2007 in favour of the petitioner raises a presumption of valid adoption, and the bank cannot refuse to accept repayment on the ground of alleged invalidity of adoption (Paras 4, 10-12).

B) Guardianship - Appointment of Guardian - Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 - Order of Court appointing guardians for abandoned child - Court held that the order dated 22.03.1990 in O.P.No.82 of 1990 appointing Mr.P.Govindasamy and Mrs.Mary Stella as guardians of the third respondent is valid and confers legal custody (Paras 2-3).

C) Succession - Rights of Adopted Child - Hindu Succession Act, 1956 - Adopted child entitled to inherit property of adoptive father - Court held that the petitioner, being the adopted daughter, is a Class I heir and has the right to repay the loans and claim the pledged jewels (Paras 10-12).

D) Writ of Mandamus - Against Cooperative Bank - Article 226 of Constitution of India - Cooperative bank is amenable to writ jurisdiction if it performs public duty - Court held that the bank, being a cooperative society, is bound to act fairly and cannot refuse to accept repayment from a legal heir (Paras 6-8).

E) Contract - Right to Redeem Pledge - Section 176 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Pawnee's right to sell pledged goods after notice - Court held that the petitioner, as legal heir, has the right to redeem the pledged jewels by paying the outstanding amount, and the bank must accept the repayment and release the jewels (Paras 6-8).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner, as an adopted daughter, is entitled to repay the jewel loans of the deceased borrower and obtain release of the pledged jewels, and whether the bank can refuse acceptance of repayment on the ground of dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The court allowed the writ petition and directed respondents 1 and 2 to accept the entire outstanding amount from the petitioner in jewel loan accounts Nos. 719385122 and 719670243 and hand over the pledged jewels to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner furnishing an indemnity bond and an undertaking to produce a succession certificate if required. The third respondent was directed to cooperate and not obstruct the process.

Law Points

  • Adoption under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act
  • 1956
  • Guardianship under Guardians and Wards Act
  • 1890
  • Succession rights of adopted child
  • Writ of Mandamus against cooperative bank
  • Right to redeem pledged goods
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (MAD) (01) 326

WP No. 41643 of 2025 and WMP No. 46671 of 2025

2026-01-06

V. Lakshminarayanan

2026:MHC:225

Mr.V.J.Arulraj for petitioner, Mr.B.Balaji for Mr.R.Gopinath for R1 & R2, Mr.Arshad Khan for R3

P.G. Monika

1. The Additional Registrar/Managing Director, The Kancheepuram Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., 2. The Branch Manager, The Kancheepuram Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., Chrompet, 3. P.G. Santhosh

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking mandamus to direct cooperative bank to accept repayment of jewel loans and release pledged jewels.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner seeks direction to respondents 1 and 2 to accept entire outstanding amount in jewel loan accounts of late P. Govindasamy and hand over pledged jewels to petitioner.

Filing Reason

Bank refused to accept repayment from petitioner due to dispute with third respondent over entitlement.

Previous Decisions

Guardianship order dated 22.03.1990 in O.P.No.82 of 1990 appointing P. Govindasamy and Mary Stella as guardians of third respondent; adoption deed dated 24.08.2007 registered as Document No.162 of 2007.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is the legal heir of late P. Govindasamy and entitled to repay the loans and claim the pledged jewels. Whether the bank can refuse to accept repayment on the ground of dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent. Whether the adoption deed raises a presumption of valid adoption under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that she is the adopted daughter and Class I heir, and the bank must accept repayment and release jewels. Third respondent contended that he is the adopted son and the petitioner's adoption is invalid. Bank submitted that it is neutral and will abide by court order.

Ratio Decidendi

The adoption deed raises a presumption of valid adoption under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, and the petitioner, as adopted daughter, is a Class I heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, entitled to repay the loans and redeem the pledged jewels. The bank cannot refuse to accept repayment on the ground of a dispute between the petitioner and the third respondent, who is only a guardian ward and not an adopted son.

Judgment Excerpts

The following facts are not in dispute: one, Mr.P.Govindasamy married Mrs.Mary Stella. From the wedlock, there were no issues. This Court was convinced with the reasons given by the couple. An order was passed on 22.03.1990, appointing Mr.P.Govindasamy and Mrs.Mary Stella, as the guardians of the 3rd respondent. The couple, thereafter, adopted the writ petitioner by way of a deed of adoption dated 24.08.2007. The adoption deed raises a presumption of valid adoption under Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956. The petitioner, as the adopted daughter, is a Class I heir under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.

Procedural History

The petitioner filed WP No. 41643 of 2025 before the Madras High Court seeking a writ of mandamus. The court heard the matter and passed the order on 06.01.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
  • Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956: Section 16
  • Hindu Succession Act, 1956:
  • Guardians and Wards Act, 1890:
  • Indian Contract Act, 1872: Section 176
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Allows Writ Petition of Adopted Daughter Against Cooperative Bank for Release of Pledged Jewels — Adoption Deed Raises Presumption of Validity Under Section 16 of Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, and Adopted Daughter is C...
Related Judgement
Tribunals NCLAT Sets Aside Direction for Inspection of Liquidator's Conduct for Violation of Natural Justice. Adverse remarks and inspection order quashed as liquidator was not given opportunity of hearing under Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.