Ramkishna Timmanna Bhat vs Laxminarayan Narna Hegde

Norman Macleod, Kt., C.J.—The only question which has been "argued in second appeal is whether an adoption by a wife to her husband, the husband being alive and a lunatic, is a good adoption. Now in this Presidency the wife cannot adopt to her husband while he is alive without his express consent. Such an adoption must necessarily be a very rare occurrence, but where the consent of the husband is expressly required and the husband is a lunatic he cannot possibly give his consent. In this case it is suggested faintly that his mother could give consent on his behalf. But if we were to hold that the mother of a lunatic could give consent on his behalf to an adoption by his wife, then we should be making an addition to the Hindu law which, we think, we are not entitled to do. We think, therefore, that the learned District Judge was right and the appeal must be dismissed with costs, One set of costs.