A valid adoption cannot be cancelled. Adoption is not a matter of contract but a matter of status. Once an adoption is validly made, it cannot be cancelled by any of the parties involved. The expression "no adoption" in the section has a retrospective effect. The concept of 'cancellation' presupposes a complete act that is sought to be cancelled, and hence, while providing for the cancellation of such an act, the present perfect tense must be used.

In the Daniraji case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the customary form of adoption prevalent in Vallabhakul (viz: Godadatta), which could be revoked before the commencement of this Act, remains revocable.

The majority of the Judges, with Mathew, J. dissenting, held that such adoptions could be revoked.

Section 15 of the Act, which prohibits the cancellation of an adoption, applies only to adoptions made after the commencement of the Act in accordance with its provisions. It has no application to adoptions made prior to the Act. The Court further held that the second part of Section 30 is introduced with abundant caution, to emphasize the validity and effect of an adoption made before the Act. According to the Court, it is clear from the first part of Section 30 that the legislature intended the applicability of all provisions contained in the Act to adoptions made before the Act and not merely those provisions affecting the validity and effect of such adoptions.

The expression 'affect' in the first part of Section 30 indicates that nothing contained in the Act, including Section 15, will apply to an adoption made prior to the Act. Such an adoption, which could be cancelled prior to the Act, could also be cancelled after the Act.

Justice Untwalia observed that the expression 'affect any adoption' would mean affecting an adoption concerning its validity and effect only. The incident of revocability was not a matter concerning the validity and effect of the adoption. Hence, the adoption could be revoked. Justice Mathew, however, dissented, holding that the custom of adoption in the Goda Datta form had been abrogated by virtue of Section 4 read with Section 5 of the Act.

According to him, the custom of revoking an adoption is dependent upon the continuance of the custom of making the adoption. With the abrogation of the custom of making the adoption, the custom of cancellation also stood abrogated, and hence it could not be cancelled after the Act. Section 30 saved only the validity and effect of the adoption but did not save the incidents of revocability, and thus the adoption could not be revoked after the Act.

Written By: S Kundu & Associates
Email: [email protected], Ph No: +9051244073