No Prohibition Against Adoption In Christian Law Even If Couple Have Natural Born Child: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court has held that there is no prohibition against adoption in the Christian law.

Unlike in the Hindu Law, there is no law prohibiting the Christian couple to adopt male or female child, although they may have natural born male or female child, the bench comprising Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice MR Shah observed.

In this case [Pharez John Abraham (Dead) vs. Arul Jothi Sivasubramaniam K], the Karnataka High Court, referring to a decision of the Kerala High Court in the case of Philips Alfred Malvin v. Y.J. Gonsalvis (AIR 1999 Kerala 187), observed that even if a defendant and another person can be said to be adopted children, adoption by a Christian couple is permissible and unlike the Hindu Law there is no law prohibiting the Christian couple to adopt male or a female child although they may have natural born male or female child, as the case may be. 

Approving the said view, the bench said:

It is required to be noted that in the Christian Law, there is no prohibition against adoption. Nothing has been pointed out that unlike in Hindu law, there is any law prohibiting the Christian couple to adopt male or female child, although they may have natural born male or female child, as the case may be. Once, it is observed and held that original defendant no. 3 and late Maccabeaus were the adopted children of John D. Abraham, both of them were entitled to the share in the property of John D. Abraham – adoptive father.

Holding that these defendants were rightly held to be the co¬sharers in the suit property belonging to John D. Abraham and they are entitled to the respective shares in the suit property belonging to John D. Abraham, the bench said:

By virtue of adoption, a child gets transplanted into a new family whereafter he or she is deemed to be member of that family as if he or she were born son or daughter of the adoptive parents having same rights which natural daughter or son had. The right which the child had to succeed to the property by virtue of being son of his natural father, in the family of his birth, is thus, clearly to be replaced by similar rights in the adoptive family, and, consequently, he would certainly obtain those rights in the capacity of a member of that family as an adopted son.     

Click here to download Judgment

Read Judgment