Madras High Court
C.Pakkir Maideen vs The Principal Secretary To Government on 12 November, 2024
Author: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
Bench: G.K.Ilanthiraiyan
W.P(MD)No.18174 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON : 05.11.2024
PRONOUNCED ON : 12.11.2024
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN
W.P(MD)No.18174 of 2018
1.C.Pakkir Maideen
2.P.Raviyathu
3.A.Peer Mohammed
4.P.Syed Ali Fathima ... Petitioners
Vs
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Commercial Taxes and Registration Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector General of Registration,
Registration Department,
100, Santhome High Road,
Mylapore,
Chennai.
3.The District Registrar,
Registration Department,
Tirunelveli.
4.The Sub-Registrar,
Kayathar Sub-Registrar Office,
Kayathar,
Tuticorin District. ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/28
W.P(MD)No.18174 of 2018
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of
India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the fourth respondent
to register the Adoption Deed dated 07.07.2018 executed by the
petitioners, by considering the representation of the petitioners
dated 21.07.2018 within the time fixed by this Court.
For Petitioners : Mr.H.Arumugam
For Respondents : Mr.S.P.Maharajan
Special Government Pleader
: Mr.M.Ajmal Khan
Senior Counsel
Amicus Curiae
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for a direction, directing
the fourth respondent to register the adoption deed, dated
09.07.2018 presented by the petitioners.
Background of the case:
2.The petitioners 1 and 2 are the husband and wife and
they gave birth to three female children. The fourth petitioner is the
sister of the second petitioner and the third petitioner is the
husband of the fourth petitioner. Therefore, the petitioners 1 and 2
decided to give their third female child by adoption to the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
petitioners 3 and 4. They had also agreed and accepted the
adoption of the petitioners 1 and 2's, third daughter, by name
Safreen Fathima in the presence of their relatives. Accordingly, they
made an adoption deed, dated 09.07.2018 and presented for
registration for all practical purposes of future of the adopted child.
However, the fourth respondent refused to register the adoption
deed on the ground that there is no provision available for
registration of adoption deed in online registration in the case of
Muslims.
Petitioners' Submission:
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
would submit that the Muslim Personal Law has not recognized the
adoption. However, it is no bar for adoption by Muslims in view of
Section 41 of the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children)
Act, 2000 (as amended in 2006) (in short hereinafter referred to as
'the J.J Act, 2000') which permits the adoption by any person
irrespective of caste, religion, creed etc. The Mohammedans are
governed by Personal Law, which is recognized by an enactment
called 'The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937' (in
short hereinafter referred to as 'the Act, 1937'). He relied upon
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Sections 2 and 3 of the Act, 1937. Therefore, Section 2 of the Act,
1937 shall be the Personal Law in which the subjects are covered.
Section 3 of the Act, 1937 deals with the declaration by a person in
respect of adoption, Wills and legacies. Insofar adoption is
concerned, the Muslim Personal Law is not applicable. Therefore,
the adoption is permissible unless and otherwise, the person who
wants to adopt has declared himself to obtain the benefit of Section
2 of the Act, 1937. Therefore, there is no bar for adoption by
Muslims.
4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
further submitted that neither the Juvenile Justice (Care and
Protection of Children) Act, 2015 (in short hereinafter referred to as
'the J.J Act, 2015) nor the Rules or the Regulation prohibits, curtails
or nullifies the practice of adoption by custom or otherwise
prevailing before the enactment of the J.J Act, 2015. The adoption
by following any custom or practice is not overruled or nullified by
any of the provisions of the J.J Act, 2015 and its Regulation. There
is no overriding or repealing of adoption also under the J.J Act,
2015. The adoption deed is not a document to be registered
compulsorily and it is an optional one. However, the fourth
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
respondent informed that in view of the introduction of online
registration, the document cannot be registered manually and the
website does not provide the column for adoption for Mohammedan.
Therefore, the provision under Sections 71 to 73 of the Registration
Act, 1908 will not arise for refusal of documents. Further, he
specifically contended that the adoption by custom under
Mohammedan Law is valid. Therefore, the registering authority
cannot refuse to register the deed of adoption.
5.In support of his contention, the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioners relied upon the following Judgments:
(i) In the Judgment in Ayubsha Amirsha Jamadar
and others Vs. Babalal Mahabut Danawade and others
reported in AIR 1938 Bombay 111, the Bombay High Court has
held as follows:
'(a) Mohammedan Law – Manager of
graveyard – female.
Though the ground in which human
remains are interred is regarded as sacred, the
duties of the manager of a graveyard are secular
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
and can be performed by a female in person or
by proxy.
(b) Mohammedan Law - Manager of
graveyard – female – custom.
A woman may be prohibited from
managing a graveyard by local usage or custom,
though not under general law.'
(ii) In the Judgement in Allahdeen Vs. Board of
Revenue and others reported in 2006 SCC Online Raj 954, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:
'16.There is no controversy between the
parties that adoption is not an absolute anathema to
the Muslim community in Rajasthan. Undoubtedly, the
Muslim Law in its pure form governed of Shariyat or
Hidaya does not recognise the principle of adoption.
However, wherever there exist a custom amongst the
Muslim community whether by way of a family custom
or by way of community custom or by way of regional
custom permitting adoption amongst Muslims, such
adoption has been recognized by the Courts in India.'
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(iii) In the Judgment in Philips Alfred Malvin Vs.
Y.J.Gonsalvis and others reported in AIR 1999 Kerala 187, the
Kerala High Court has held as follows:
'8.The Canon Law does not prohibit adoption.
The Code of Canon Law, commissioned by the
Canon Law Society of America, goes to show that
Canon 110 relates to adoption, which reads as
follows:
'Children who have been adopted
according to the norm of civil taw are
considered as being the children of the
person or persons who have adopted them.
Adopted children are usually not at all, or
occasionally not wholly, related to the
parents adopting them ......... Church law
adopts the civil law pertinent to the area
and states that adopted children are held
to be the equivalent of natural children of
an adopting couple in those instances in
which adoption has been duly formalized
according to the Civil Law.'
Canon 111 provides, that-
'A child of parents who belong to the Latin
Church is ascribed to it by reception of
baptism, or, if one or the other parent does
not belong to the Latin Church and both
parents agree in choosing that the child be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
baptized in the Latin Church, the child is
ascribed to it by reception of baptism but, if
the agreement is lacking, the child is
ascribed to the Ritual Church to which the
father belongs.'
From the above Canon Laws, it can be seen
that the Church has adopted civil law
pertaining to the area. Therefore, adoption
made by Correa couple cannot be said to
be invalid.
9.Mohammaden Law also recognise adoption
if there is custom prevailing among Mohammaden
communities. The custom is accepted to have the
force of law, as is held in AIR 1936 Lahore 465.
Section 29 of the Oudh Estates Act, 1869 permits a
Mohammedan Talukdar to adopt a son. In the
State of Jammu & Kashmir, the existence of local
custom regarding adoption has been recognised by
virtue of Sri Pratap Jammu & Kashmir Laws
Consolidation Act, 1977. The right of the couple to
adopt a son is a constitutional right guaranteed
under Article 21. The right to life includes those
things which make life meaningful. Correa couple
might have thought of making their life more
meaningful by adopting a son.
10.Thus, the Hindu Law, Mohammedan Law
and Canon Law recognize adoption. Therefore,
simply because there is no separate statute
providing adoption, it cannot be said that the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
adoption made by Correa couple is invalid. Since
the adopted son gets all the rights of a natural
born child, he is entitled to inherit the assets of
George Correa couple. The learned Subordinate
Judge went wrong in holding that unless adoption
is recognised either by personal law, custom or by
Canon Law, the first respondent cannot claim right
over the plaint schedule property, as the adoption
itself is invalid in the eye of law. Therefore, the
decree and judgment appealed against are liable to
be set aside.'
Respondents submission:
6.The fourth respondent filed a counter-affidavit and
Mr.S.P.Maharajan, learned Special Government Pleader appearing
for the respondents submitted that the petitioners submitted a
representation seeking registration of adoption deed, dated
21.07.2018 and it is pending on the file of the fourth respondent.
When the fourth respondent is waiting for consideration with the
consultation of its superior with regard to the registration of the
adoption deed of a Muslim, the petitioners filed this Writ Petition and
it is pre-mature. Further, there is no provision in the Registration
Act, 1908 to register the adoption deed presented by an individual
who belongs to the Muslim religion. There is no software designed in
the Registration office to register the adoption deed submitted by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
the Muslim. The Personal Law of Muslims does not recognize
adoption among Muslims. Therefore, the deed of adoption by any
Muslim is void and as such, it cannot be registered and the fourth
respondent rightly refused to register the adoption deed.
7.While pending Writ Petition, this Court appointed
Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, learned Senior Counsel as Amicus Curiae to assist
this Court.
Submissions made by Amicus Curiae:
8.Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, learned Senior Counsel, who was
appointed as Amicus curiae, has stated that the Mohammedan law
does not recognize adoption as a mode of filiation. Section 2 of the
Act, 1937 speaks of the application of Muslim Personal Law for
Muslims on the subjects enumerated under Section 2 of the Act,
1937. Accordingly, adoption is not a subject enumerated under
Section 2 of the Act, 1937 or the applicability of adoption for
Muslims. However, Section 3 of the Act, 1937 contemplates that in
case of adoption, Wills and legacies, Muslim Personal Law can be
applied if a Muslim who is competent to contract makes a
declaration that Section 2 of the Act, 1937 shall apply to him and
his descendants in addition with the matters enumerated under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Section 2 of the Act, 1937. He further submitted that Islam in
principle does not recognize adoption as a mode of filiation, but the
Act, 1937, recognizes custom such as adoption, Wills and legacies
and it requires to be pleaded and proved only before the competent
civil Court.
9.Heard Mr.H.Arumugam, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners, Mr.S.P.Maharjan, learned Special Government
Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 and Mr.M.Ajmal Khan,
learned Senior Counsel, who was appointed as Amicus Curiae and
perused the materials placed before this Court.
10.The petitioners 1 and 2 are the husband and wife and
they gave birth to three female children. The fourth petitioner is the
sister of the second petitioner and the third petitioner is the
husband of the fourth petitioner. Therefore, the petitioners 1 and 2
decided to give their third female child by adoption to the
petitioners 3 and 4. They had also agreed and accepted the
adoption of the petitioners 1 and 2's, third daughter, by name
Safreen Fathima in the presence of their relatives. Accordingly, they
made an adoption deed, dated 09.07.2018 and presented for
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
registration for all practical purposes of future of the adopted child.
However, the fourth respondent refused to register the adoption
deed on the ground that there is no provision available for
registration of adoption deed in online registration in the case of
Muslims.
11.The Mohammedan Law does not recognize adoption
as a mode of filiation. The Mohammedans are governed by Personal
Law, which is recognized by the Act, 1937. It is relevant to extract
the provision contemplated under Section 2 of the Act, 1937
hereunder:
'2.Application of Personal Law to
Muslims.-
Notwithstanding any custom or usage to
the contrary, in all questions (save questions
relating to agricultural land) regarding intestate
succession, special property of females, including
personal properly inherited or obtained under
contract or gift or any other provision of Personal
Law. marriage, dissolution of marriage, including
talaq, ila, zihar, lian, khula and mubaraat,
maintenance, dower, guardianship, gifts, trusts and
trust properties, and wakfs (other than charities and
charitable institutions and charitable and religious
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
endowments) the rule of decision in cases where the
parties are Muslims shall be the Muslim Personal
Law (Shariat).'
Adoption is not a subject enumerated under Section 2 of the Act,
1937 or the applicability of adoption for Muslims.
12.Further, it is relevant to extract the provision
contemplated under Section 3 of the Act, 1937 hereunder:
'3.Power to make a declaration.—
(1) Any person who satisfies the prescribed
authority—
(a) that he is a Muslim, and
(b) that he is competent to contract
within the meaning of section 11 of the Indian
Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872), and
(c) that he is a resident of 1 [the
territories to which this Act extends], may by
declaration in the prescribed form and filed
before the prescribed authority declare that he
desires to obtain the benefit of 2 [the provisions
of this section], and thereafter the provisions of
section 2 shall apply to the declarant and all his
minor children and their descendants as if in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
addition to the matters enumerated therein
adoption, wills and legacies were also specified.
(2) Where the prescribed authority
refuses to accept a declaration under sub-
section (1), the person desiring to make the
same may appeal to such office as the State
Government may, by general or special order,
appoint in this behalf, and such officer may, if
he is satisfied that the appellant is entitled to
make the declaration, order the prescribed
authority to accept the same.'
The purport of Section 3 of the Act, 1937 appears to be that if a
Muslim is governed by the customs, may continue to be governed
by the said custom in case of adoption, Wills and legacies unless
he/she makes a declaration to the contrary.
13.The J.J Act, 2000 was enacted to consolidate and
amend the law relating to juveniles in conflict with the law and
children in need of care and protection. Chapter IV of the J.J Act,
2000 pertains to rehabilitation and social reintegration in which
Section 41(2) of the J.J Act, 2000 says that adoption shall be
resorted to for the rehabilitation of the children who are orphans,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
abandoned or surrendered through such mechanism as prescribed.
It was challenged on the ground that the adoption irrespective of
religion created thereunder was violative of Muslim Personal Law.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Shabnam
Hashmi Vs. Union of India reported in (2014) 4 SCC 1 held that
the J.J Act, 2000 is an enabling legislation which does not impose
any compulsive action on a prospective parent. Thus, it observed
that personal beliefs and faints cannot dictate the operation of
provisions of an enabling statute and an optional legislation that
does not contain an unavoidable imperative cannot be stultified by
the principles of Personal Law which, however, would always govern
any person who chooses to submit himself until the uniform civil
code is enacted. Subsequently, the J.J Act, 2000 was repealed by
the Act 2 of 2016 viz., The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of
Children) Act, 2015 (in short hereinafter referred to as 'J.J Act,
2015') with the object to consolidate and amend the law relating to
children alleged and found to be in conflict with law and children in
need of care and protection. By virtue of Section 111 thereof, the J.J
Act, 2000 was repealed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
14.With regard to adoption and its process, the relevant
provisions of the J.J Act, 2015 reads as follows:
'a.Section 2(2) defines Adoption as 'the
process through which the adopted child is
permanently separated from his biological parents
and becomes the lawful child of his adoptive parents
with all the rights, privileges and responsibilities that
are attached to a biological child'.
b.Section 2(3) defines Adoption Regulations as
'the regulations framed by the Authority and notified
by the Central Government in respect of adoption'.
c.Section 2(23) defines Court as 'a civil court,
which has jurisdiction in matters of adoption and
guardianship and may include the District Court,
Family Court and City Civil Courts'.
d.Section 2(49) defines Prospective Adoptive
Parents as 'a person or persons eligible to adopt a
child as per the provisions of section 57.
e.Section 2(52) defines Relative as 'in relation
to a child for the purpose of adoption under this Act,
means a paternal uncle or aunt, or a maternal uncle
or aunt, or parental grandparent or maternal
grandparent.'
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
The Central Government also notified the Adoption Regulations,
2017 in pursuant to power contemplated under Section 68 of the J.J
Act, 2015 and its relevant Regulations are as follows:
'a.Regulation 2(4) defines 'Child Adoption
Resource Information and Guidance System' as
meaning an online information system for
facilitating, guiding and monitoring the adoption
programme.
b.Regulation 2(12) defines 'in-country
adoption' means adoption of a child by a citizen of
India residing in India;
c.Regulation 5 identifies the additional
eligibility criteria for prospective adoptive parents
which must be read along with Section 57 of the
parent legislation.
d.Regulation 51 stipulates the procedure of in-
country relative adoptions, which would be
applicable to the present writ petition. It requires
that the prospective adoptive parents register
themselves under the Child Adoption Resource
Information and Guidance System and follow the
legal process identified under Regulation 55. Further
compulsory steps include securing the consent of
the biological parents in Form Schedule XIX to the
Regulations, the consent of the child if it is above 5
years of age, an affidavit of the prospective adoptive
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
parents in Form Schedule XXIV and an application to
be filed by the prospective adoptive parents under
Form Schedule XXX.
e.Regulation 55 lays down the legal procedure
for the prospective adoptive parents to approach the
competent civil court (Family Court or District Court
or the City Civil Court, as the case may be), to file
an adoption application in order to secure an
adoption order. After securing an adoption order
from the Court, the Regulation requires the
prospective parents to obtain a certified copy of the
same from the Court and furnish it to the District
Child Protection Unit for online submission to the
Central Adoption Resource Authority established
under Section 68 of the JJ Act, 2015.'
Observations:
15.The above Regulations prescribe the procedure to
safeguard the interest of children and to prevent the misuse of
children in trafficking and other illegal activities, as a comprehensive
Act, irrespective of religion dehors the Mohammedan Law does not
recognize adoption as a mode of filiation. Therefore, a person who
intends to take a child of a relative in adoption cannot bypass the
procedure mandated in law and seek for registration of the adoption
deed.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
16.Insofar as the registration of the adoption deed is
concerned, it is not contemplated under the laws governing
adoption. Therefore, the registration of the adoption deed cannot be
asked as a matter of right before the registering authority to
register the adoption deed. Sections 17 and 18 of the Registration
Act, 1908 deal with the documents which ought to be compulsorily
registered and the documents where registration is only optional.
Accordingly, the adoption deed is not compulsorily registerable.
Though the adoption deed was registered, it has no legal sanctity.
17.The deeds of marriage or divorce are registered by
the Sub-Registrars. Both deeds are not registered by the Registrar
of Marriages either under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 or the
Christian Marriage Act, 1872. Both the enactments governing
different subjects prescribe certain mandatory procedures for the
performance of marriages. If a person whose marriage is not
performed in the manner as provided under the above legislation by
entering into an agreement in the name of the deed of marriage
and got registered before the registering authority, who ordinarily
registers documents of conveyance cannot claim any right of
relationship under the said registration of the deed of marriage.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Therefore, this issue has been dealt with in a detailed manner by
the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of B.Jegadeesh
Chandra Bose Vs. Superintendent of Police, Kanyakumari
District reported in 2009 (1) LW (Crl) 181. The relevant
paragraphs are extracted hereunder:
'13.Insofar as the Hindu marriages are
concerned, Section 5 of the Hindu Marriages Act
contemplates conditions for a Hindu marriage, section
7 relates to ceremonies and Section 8 relates to
registration of Hindu Marriages. Unless conditions
under Section 5 relating to a valid consent and either
of the spouse is not insane, the bride groom has
completed 21 years and bride completes 18 years and
they are not within the prohibited degrees and are
not sapindas, marriage cannot be solemnized. Unless
there is solemnization marriage, it cannot be
performed as per the ceremonies under Section 7 and
consequently registration of such marriage under
Section 8 cannot be done. Rule 5 of the Tamil Nadu
Hindu Marriage (Registration) Rules, 1969,
contemplates compulsory registration of marriage and
the mode of application for registration. Applications
are to be made in Form-I, along with application in
Form-III, for registration of Hindu Marriage on the
date of solemnization and a declaration is also
provided as per Rule 10 in Form No.III by the
husband and wife where the marriage is registered on
the date of solemnization. Unless conditions under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Sections 5 and 7 are fulfilled, the marriage cannot be
registered under Section 8 and the registration of the
marriage should also be in conformity with the Rules
referred to above. Without following the above, a
Hindu Marriage cannot be registered. Further,
registration of the marriage cannot be equated to a
registration of marriage agreement.
14.Under The Indian Christian Marriage
Act, Section 60 contemplates conditions of marriage,
where both the spouses should be Christians and
again the bride groom must be over 21 years and the
bride should be over 18 years, apart from some other
conditions. Part-VI of the said Act contemplates a
notice of intended marriage before registration of
marriage, filing a copy of the notice to be entered into
the marriage notice book, issue a certificate of notice
and the oath made thereon, issue an oath before the
issue of certificate, the consent of father or guardian
and thereafter filing petition for registration. For a
false oath, declaration, oath or a certificate for
procuring marriage, a penalty is also contemplated
under Section 66 of the Act. Hence, a procedure is
contemplated for the marriage and for the
consequential registration of such marriage and issue
of certificates.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
15.In terms of Section 3 of the Special
Marriages Act, marriage officers are appointed by the
Government by notifying in the official gazette.
Section 4 contemplates conditions relating to
solemnization of special marriages. Section-5
contemplates notice to intended marriage for a period
not less than 30 days immediately preceding the date
of such notice. Section 6 contemplates notice book
and publication. Section 7 contemplates objection to
marriage. Section 8 contemplates procedure on
receipt of petition and an enquiry as contemplated by
the Marriage Officers in terms of Section 9.
Thereafter, the marriage is registered and a
certificate could be issued under Section 3. A
procedure is also contemplated under Chapter-III for
registration of marriages celebrated in other forms.
16.On the above backdrop of the specific
provisions, any marriage, which is not solemnized as
per the respective provisions of Laws, cannot be
recognized as a valid marriage and consequently the
same cannot be registered. Further, such marriage
registration must be by following the procedures
provided under the respective enactments. Under
these circumstances, a mere presentation of
documents for registration of marriage cannot by
itself confer any legal status to the parties and such
registration of marriage would be contrary to the
procedures provided under the respective
enactments.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
17.Insofar as the submission of the
learned Additional Advocate General as to the
Suyamariyathai and Seerthiruththa marriages is
concerned, here again, under Section 7-A, the
procedure as contemplated under the Section to
recognize the marriage alone is dispensed with and
made optional. Nevertheless, in terms of Section 8 of
the Act, registration is compulsory and must be done
only in accordance with Section 8 of the Act and the
corresponding rules, namely Rule 5 and Form Nos.I
and II of the Rules.
18.Of course, Section 22-A of the Act was
struck down by the Apex Court on the ground that
the term "opposed to public policy" was vague and
consequently the Government Order G.O.Ms.No.150,
Commercial Taxes Department, dated 22.09.2000
was also quashed by this Court. In our opinion, in
terms of Rule 162-A of the Registration Rules, no
registration officer shall accept for registration any
document or service agreement evidencing bonded
labour or transaction constituting any offence under
any law or opposed to public policy or morality.
Though Section 22-A was struck down on the ground
that the power conferred on the Government to direct
the Registrars not to register certain documents as
opposed to public policy, in the teeth of other
conditions, particularly transaction constituting an
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
offence under any law or morality, the registration of
marriage agreement without following any of the
procedures of the respective enactments cannot be
permitted. Of course, knowing the serious
implications of registration of such marriage
agreements, the Government themselves have come
out with a draft amendment proposing to insert
Section 21-A in the Registration Act whereby under
Section 21-A(3), directing the registering officer not
to register any document evidencing any agreement
relating to marriage or to live together as husband
and wife, etc.
19.Under these circumstances, in order to
curtail the misuse of such marriage agreements,
whereby the hapless women may also possibly be
misused, we deem it necessary that the Registrars
and Sub- Registrars under the control of the
Inspector General of Registration, Government of
Tamilnadu, should be restrained from entertaining
any marriage agreements produced without following
the mandatory provisions of respective enactments
and consequently registering them. Accordingly, there
will be an order of injunction.'
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Court's view:
18.Thus, the registering authorities are restrained from
registering any document of marriage or divorce as it has no legal
sanctity under any law. Likewise, the registration of the adoption
deed between the petitioners has also no legal sanctity under any
law and it will not give any rights for the parties to the adoption.
Further, the registration of the adoption deed will be a futile
exercise, since it has no legal sanctity under any law. Therefore, the
registration of the adoption deed does not arise before any of the
registering authorities. Hence, the Judgments relied upon by the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioners are not applicable to
the case on hand.
19.In view of the above, the direction sought for by the
petitioners in this Writ Petition cannot be granted and the Writ
Petition itself is devoid of merits and liable to be dismissed.
Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands dismissed. However, the
petitioners are at liberty to invoke the regulations as contemplated
under the Adoption Regulations, 2017 notified in the Gazette of
India Extraordinary dated 04.01.2017 pursuant to the powers
contemplated under Section 68 of the J.J Act, 2015, which came
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
into force on 16.01.2017. This Court places its appreciation on
record as to the valuable assistance rendered by Mr.M.Ajmal Khan,
learned Senior Counsel appointed by this Court as Amicus Curiae to
assist this Court. There shall be no order as to costs.
20.The Inspector General of Registration,
Government of Tamil Nadu shall issue necessary Circular to
all the Registrars restraining them from registering any deed
of adoption executed by any person irrespective of their
religious without following mandatory provisions of their
respective enactments.
12.11.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
ps
Note: Registry is directed to mark a copy of this order to the
Inspector General of Registration, Government of Tamil Nadu
with a request to the Inspector General of Registration to
communicate this order to all the Registrars empowered to
register the deed of any conveyance.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
Commercial Taxes and Registration Department,
Fort St. George,
Chennai.
2.The Inspector General of Registration,
Registration Department,
100, Santhome High Road,
Mylapore,
Chennai.
3.The District Registrar,
Registration Department,
Tirunelveli.
4.The Sub-Registrar,
Kayathar Sub-Registrar Office,
Kayathar,
Tuticorin District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
ps
Order made in
12.11.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
