Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

1. This appeal raises an important question of Hindu law, which may be stated as follows: When a married Hindu, having a son, is given in adoption by his natural father, does the Hindu's son also, like his father, lose the gotra and rights of inheritance in the family of his birth and acquire the gotra and a right of succession to the property of the family into which the Hindu is adopted?

2. The parties to this second appeal are Jains, but, in the absence of any special custom, Jains are governed by the ordinary Hindu law: Bhagwandas Tejmal v. Rajmal 10 B.H.C.R. 241; Sheo Singh Mai v. Musammat Dakho 51. A. 87 at p. 108 : 1 A. 688 : 6 N.W.P.H.C.R. 382.

12. The original word for family" in this text of Manu is gotra, Mr. Jayakar argues that gotra means santana, literally, continuation, as observed by Telang, J. in Rachava v. Kalingapa 16 B. 716 or santati, literally, a line of descendants, as explained in the Dattaha Mimansa (page 25, Shiromani's Edition), and the Samskara Kaustubha.

13. These words are not always used of descendants only. They are often used as meauing ' family," the whole group of ascendants and descendants. Medhatithi says that, according to some, gotra means vamsha, which applies both to the line of' ascendants and of descendants. The author of the Samskara Kaustubha cites a smriti of Trikandi, which says that santati, gotra, janana and kula are synonymous terms. Kula means, literally, family.

15. Vijnaneshvara in the Mitakshara gives us the meaning of gotra, (Mit. Section V, pl. 6) on the authority of Vrihat Manu. 'It reaches as far as the memory of birth and name extends." If gotra means both the ascending and the descending line of the natural father of the man given in adoption, the latter, according to Manu's text, ceases, after adoption, to have connection with both the lines. That includes his own sons born before the adoption.

16. The text of Manu, which we are now discussing, in terms relates to the personal status of the man given in. adoption. It predicates certain things of him, and him only, as the result of adoption. They are the extinction in case of the gotra (family) of his natural father and the right of succession to this property. And according to Hindu logicians (Naiyayikas), where in a text certain qualities are predicated of a person, they apply to him only and the rule in the text should not be extended to others, Mann's text, therefore, must be confined in its application to the person of whom it speaks, that is, the man given in adoption, and not extended to his son born before the adoption.

33. But then, argues Mr. Jayakar, if it be held that the son of a Hindu begotten before the latter's adoption, does not pass with the Hindu into his adoptive family but remains a member of the family of his birth, this result must follow that the son in question cannot, on the Hindu's death, perform the different obsequial ceremonies, due from every son to his deceased father, and that because the father in such a case has ceased to be his father by going into another gotra or family. The son can perform the shraddha and other death ceremonies of his grandfather but the Shastras prescribe that in all these ceremonies the oblations must be offered to the soul of the father first where the father has died. Here there is no father, he having gone into another family, and if there is no father, the oblations to the grandfather and other ancestors cannot be given. This argument involves the assumption that when a married man having a son is given in adoption, one result of the adoption is that it destroys the natural relation of father and son between them for the purposes of obsequial ceremonies. All that Mann's text) to which reference has been made in the foregoing part of this judgment, lays down is that the man given in adoption loses his natural gotra or family and the right to inherit the property of his natural father and with them his right to offer pinda or funeral oblations to his natural father. But the text does not say that the son of that man, born before his adoption ceases to be his son and loses the right to offer funeral oblations to his soul, in case of his death. For one thing, according to the Hindu Shastras, "by no means can you make your father cease to be" (Jaimini Bibliotheca Indica series, Vol. I, p. 742). The mere fact that the father has gone into another family by adoption and ceased to be of his son's gotra or family cannot unmake what he naturally is-the son's father. The gotras of the two may differ in consequence of the adoption but it is not always, necessary for funeral ceremonies that the person performing them should be of the same gotra as the deceased. A sister's son and a son-in-law can perform those ceremonies and yet they are not of the same gotra. So a son begotten before the adoption of his father would be entitled to perform the latter's funeral ceremonies. All the Smriti says is that such ceremonies shall be performed by a son". It does not make the obligation dependent upon the continuance of the father in the-same gotra as the son.