Understanding the Doctrine of Relation Back in Mahesh vs Sangram Case
In the case of Mahesh vs. Sangram & Ors., the Supreme Court of India addressed the implications of adoption by a Hindu widow on property rights, particularly concerning the doctrine of relation back and the adopted child’s rights over the adoptive mother’s absolute property.
Brief Facts
- A Hindu widow adopted a child after her husband’s death.
- Prior to the adoption, the widow had acquired absolute ownership of certain properties under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
- Post-adoption, disputes arose regarding the adopted child’s entitlement to these properties, especially concerning any alienations made by the widow after the adoption.
Legal Principles
- The doctrine of Relation Back: In Hindu law, adoption by a widow is deemed to relate back to the date of her husband’s death, positioning the adopted child as if born to the deceased husband.
- Section 12(c) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 (HAMA): This provision stipulates that an adopted child cannot divest any person of an estate vested in them before the adoption.
- Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 (HSA): It grants absolute ownership to a female Hindu over any property possessed by her, whether acquired before or after the commencement of the Act.
Judgment
The Supreme Court held that:
- The adopted child cannot claim rights over the adoptive mother’s absolute property that she acquired before the adoption.
- Any alienation of such property by the adoptive mother after the adoption remains valid and cannot be contested by the adopted child.
- The application of Section 12(c) of HAMA ensures that the adopted child does not divest the adoptive mother of her absolute property rights established under Section 14(1) of HSA.
This judgment underscores that while the doctrine of relation back grants certain retrospective rights to an adopted child, it does not override the absolute property rights of a female Hindu acquired prior to the adoption.