By using this site, you agree to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Accept
ApniLawApniLawApniLaw
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Reading: Section 16 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Presumption As To Registered Documents Relating To Adoptions.
Share
Notification Show More
Font ResizerAa
ApniLawApniLaw
Font ResizerAa
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court
  • Acts
  • Documentation
  • BNSS
  • Home
  • Law Forum
  • Find Lawyers
  • Legal Services
  • Legal News
  • Legal Jobs
  • Legal Articles
    • Documentation
    • Marriage and Divorce
    • Land Dispute & Will
    • Civil
    • Criminal
    • Supreme Court
    • High Court
  • Bare Acts
    • BNSS
    • BNS
    • BSA
    • CrPC
    • DPDP
    • Hindu Marriage Act
    • IPC
    • POCSO
Have an existing account? Sign In
Follow US
  • Advertise
© 2022 Foxiz News Network. Ruby Design Company. All Rights Reserved.
ApniLaw > Blog > Bare Act > The Hindu Adoptions And Maintenance Act > Section 16 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Presumption As To Registered Documents Relating To Adoptions.
The Hindu Adoptions And Maintenance Act

Section 16 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Presumption As To Registered Documents Relating To Adoptions.

Apni Law
Last updated: May 8, 2025 5:45 pm
Apni Law
2 months ago
Share
Section 16 - The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act - Presumption As To Registered Documents Relating To Adoptions
Section 16 - The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act - Presumption As To Registered Documents Relating To Adoptions
SHARE

Code: Section 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956

“Whenever any document registered under any law for the time being in force is produced before any court purporting to record an adoption made and is signed by the person giving and the person taking the child in adoption, the court shall presume that the adoption has been made in compliance with the provisions of this Act unless and until it is disproved.”


State Amendment – Uttar Pradesh

In Uttar Pradesh, Section 16 has been amended as follows:

“Section 16 shall be re-numbered as sub-section (1) and the following shall be inserted as sub-section (2):

(2) In case any adoption is made on or after the first day of January, 1977, no Court in Uttar Pradesh shall accept any evidence in proof of the giving and taking of the child in adoption, except a document recording an adoption, made and signed by the person giving and the person taking the child in adoption, and registered under any law for the time being in force:

Provided that secondary evidence of such document shall be admissible in the circumstances and manner laid down in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.”

[Vide Uttar Pradesh Act 57 of 1976, s. 35]


Explanation of Section 16

Section 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act creates a legal presumption in favor of registered adoption documents. If a document that records an adoption is registered under applicable law and signed by both the giver and taker of the child, courts must presume that the adoption has been validly made under the Act.

Contents
Code: Section 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956State Amendment – Uttar PradeshExplanation of Section 16Uttar Pradesh Amendment HighlightsIllustrationsExample 1: Presumption of Valid AdoptionExample 2: Uttar Pradesh RestrictionCommon Questions and Answers1. What does Section 16 of the Act imply?2. Is the presumption under Section 16 final?3. What is the impact of the Uttar Pradesh amendment to Section 16?4. Can oral evidence be used to prove adoption in Uttar Pradesh?5. What qualifies as a valid adoption document under Section 16?Conclusion

This presumption can, however, be rebutted if there is evidence to the contrary. The provision is designed to reduce unnecessary litigation and give authenticity to properly documented adoptions.

Uttar Pradesh Amendment Highlights

In Uttar Pradesh, the rules are stricter. For adoptions made after January 1, 1977:

  • No oral or alternative evidence is accepted unless the registered adoption document is produced.
  • Only a properly signed and registered adoption deed will be considered valid primary evidence.
  • Secondary evidence of such a document may be accepted under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Illustrations

Example 1: Presumption of Valid Adoption

A registered adoption deed signed by both adoptive and biological parents is presented in court. The court presumes the adoption is valid under Section 16 unless someone provides strong evidence to prove otherwise.

Example 2: Uttar Pradesh Restriction

In a case in Uttar Pradesh, a man claims to have adopted a child in 1980 but provides only oral testimony. The court rejects the claim, stating that under the amended Section 16, only a registered document is acceptable proof of adoption.


Common Questions and Answers

1. What does Section 16 of the Act imply?

It creates a legal presumption that a registered adoption document is proof of a valid adoption unless disproved.

2. Is the presumption under Section 16 final?

No. It is a rebuttable presumption, which means the court will accept the adoption as valid unless there is evidence to the contrary.

3. What is the impact of the Uttar Pradesh amendment to Section 16?

For adoptions made in Uttar Pradesh on or after January 1, 1977, no court will accept proof of adoption unless a registered document is submitted.

4. Can oral evidence be used to prove adoption in Uttar Pradesh?

No. Oral or alternative evidence is not acceptable unless secondary evidence of the registered adoption deed meets the standards of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

5. What qualifies as a valid adoption document under Section 16?

A document that is:

  • Registered under existing law,
  • Signed by both the person giving and the person taking the child in adoption.

Conclusion

Section 16 of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, provides significant evidentiary value to registered adoption documents. It helps establish adoption validity with fewer disputes and enhances legal clarity. The Uttar Pradesh amendment strengthens the requirement further by mandating the production of registered documentation for proving adoption in court. This provision is central to safeguarding the integrity and legality of the adoption process in India.

For legal guidance on adoption procedures, documentation, or family law matters, visit ApniLaw.


You Might Also Like

Section 9 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Persons Capable Of Giving In Adoption.

Section 5 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Adoptions To Be Regulated By This Chapter.

Section 20 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Maintenance Of Children And Aged Parents.

Section 3 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Definitions.

Section 8 – The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act (HAMA) – Capacity Of A Female Hindu To Take In Adoption.

Share This Article
Facebook Email Print
Previous Article How To File For Divorce In India Mental Disorders Like Schizophrenia Not Enough for Divorce, Living Conditions Must Be Severe: Patna High Court
Next Article High Court of Jammu & Kashmir Father Not Liable To Pay Maintenance To Able-bodied, Unmarried, Adult Daughters Under Section 488 of J&K CrPC: J&K High Court
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Follow US

Find US on Social Medias
FacebookLike
XFollow
InstagramFollow
YoutubeSubscribe

Weekly Newsletter

Subscribe to our newsletter to get our newest articles instantly!
Popular News
High Court of Gauhati
Gauhati High CourtHigh CourtMarriage and DivorceNewsWomen Rights

Mere Refusal To Marry Not Cheating Without Fraud: Gauhati High Court

Amna Kabeer
By Amna Kabeer
5 months ago
Liquor Policy Case: Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal Moves Supreme Court Against ED Arrest
Supreme Court Postpones Hearing On Savukku Shankar’s Plea Against 16 FIRs, Tamil Nadu To Submit Additional Documents
Bombay High Court Ruling: Association With Dawood Ibrahim Not Punishable Under UAPA
PC & Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques Act Offences Are Cognizable, FIR Not Barred By Law: Delhi HC
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
Ad imageAd image

Your one-stop destination for legal news, articles, queries, and a directory of lawyers in India – all under one roof at ApniLaw.

Stay Updated

  • BNSS
  • News
  • Documentation
  • Acts
  • Supreme Court
  • High Court

Information

  • ApniLaw Services
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service

Advertise

  • Advertise with us
  • Newsletters
  • Deal

Find Us on Socials

ApniLawApniLaw
Follow US
© ApniLaw 2025. All Rights Reserved.
bg-n
Join Us!
Subscribe to our newsletter and never miss our latest news, podcasts etc..
Zero spam, Unsubscribe at any time.

More Interesting News

High Court of Bombay

Mere Loan Recovery not Amount to Abetment to Suicide: Bombay HC

Supreme Court Urges Madhya Pradesh High Court To Reconsider Termination Of Female Judges

Capital Punishment Needs To Be Rarest of Rare Case: Madhya Pradesh HC Replaces Death Penalty with 25-Year Imprisonment in POCSO Case

login
Welcome Back!

Sign in to your account

Username or Email Address
Password

Lost your password?