Recently, the Punjab & Haryana High Court held that Family Courts constituted under the Family Courts Act do not possess the jurisdiction to adjudicate matters concerning the validity of adoption deeds. This decision arose in a case involving the dismissal of a petition by the Family Court regarding guardianship, where the underlying issue was the legitimacy of an adoption deed. The Division Bench noted that adoption disputes fall outside the express scope of powers conferred upon Family Courts, emphasizing that such exclusion is deliberate and consistent with the broader legislative intent.
The case stemmed from an appeal filed under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act challenging an order of the Family Court. The appellant had approached the Family Court seeking a declaration of guardianship over a minor child. In response, the validity of the adoption deed was questioned. The Family Court dismissed the petition, holding that it lacked jurisdiction to determine disputes related to adoption.
The appellant argued that since the issue pertained to guardianship of the minor, the Family Court was competent to examine the validity of the adoption deed in the course of such proceedings. It was contended that such incidental questions should not be divorced from the principal relief sought, i.e., guardianship.
Speaking for the Bench, Justice Rohit Kapoor clarified that the Family Courts Act, while granting jurisdiction in matters such as custody, access, and guardianship, does not extend such jurisdiction to adoption disputes. The Court observed, “Parliament, in its wisdom, has consciously excluded adoption-related disputes from the purview of Family Courts, despite both 'Adoption' and 'Maintenance' being governed by the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956.”
The Bench further clarified that the structure and objectives of the Family Courts Act, which emphasize a conciliatory and summary procedure, are ill-suited for adjudicating the complex legal questions involved in determining the validity of an adoption deed.
Citing Section 9 of the Civil Procedure Code, the Court reiterated the settled legal principle that all civil suits are maintainable unless expressly or impliedly barred by law. It emphasized, “The ouster of the jurisdiction of a civil court cannot be lightly presumed. Such exclusion must be explicitly expressed or necessarily implied.”
The Court drew support from several precedents, including Satya Narayan Prasad Gupta v. Bijay Kumar Gupta, Kuldeep Kumar v. Naveen Kumar , Carsten Friis v. Nil, and Anil Kumar v. Sep. Bikram Singh Bisht, all of which upheld the principle that adoption matters lie outside the Family Court's domain.
Dismissing the appeal, the High Court affirmed the Family Court’s decision and upheld the position that Family Courts lack jurisdiction to adjudicate disputes related to the validity of an adoption deed. The judgment serves as a reaffirmation of the narrow and specific jurisdiction conferred upon Family Courts and the distinct treatment adoption disputes continue to receive under civil jurisprudence.
Picture Source :
