DOI Page / Citation link:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.49827#0181
166 THE LAW OF ADOPTION, HISTORICALLY CONSIDERED.
Lecture is no rite prescribed for an agreement to the effect that the
vn- son shall belong to both fathers.” I have been informed
~ by Pandit Dundiraj of Benares, that in the N. W. Pro-
vinces also adoptions of the Dvyamushyayana type are
very common now-a-days, though express stipulations to
that effect are as unknown as the term Dvyamushyayana.
Conclusion. The result of this brief review of some of the principal
doctrines of the Indian Law of Adoption may be summed
up in a single sentence : It is simply a misfortune that so
much authority should have been attributed in the Courts
all over India to such a treatise as Nandapandita’s Mimam-
sa which abounds more in fanciful distinctions than per-
haps any other work on adoption, and it is high time that
the numerous other Treatises on Adoption should be
thoroughly examined and given their due weight. Even
hitherto, in spite of the pressure exercised by the authority
of Nandapandita, the prevailing tendency of decisions has
been in favor of divesting adoption of arbitrary restric-
tions, which have no foundation in equity and,justice.
The history of adoption in some of those European coun-
tries where adoption has been sanctioned by Legislation
offers a parallel to this.
Lecture is no rite prescribed for an agreement to the effect that the
vn- son shall belong to both fathers.” I have been informed
~ by Pandit Dundiraj of Benares, that in the N. W. Pro-
vinces also adoptions of the Dvyamushyayana type are
very common now-a-days, though express stipulations to
that effect are as unknown as the term Dvyamushyayana.
Conclusion. The result of this brief review of some of the principal
doctrines of the Indian Law of Adoption may be summed
up in a single sentence : It is simply a misfortune that so
much authority should have been attributed in the Courts
all over India to such a treatise as Nandapandita’s Mimam-
sa which abounds more in fanciful distinctions than per-
haps any other work on adoption, and it is high time that
the numerous other Treatises on Adoption should be
thoroughly examined and given their due weight. Even
hitherto, in spite of the pressure exercised by the authority
of Nandapandita, the prevailing tendency of decisions has
been in favor of divesting adoption of arbitrary restric-
tions, which have no foundation in equity and,justice.
The history of adoption in some of those European coun-
tries where adoption has been sanctioned by Legislation
offers a parallel to this.