Widow's power to adopt and retrospective adoption defeated a reversionary claim under Hindu law.

A widow's power to adopt under Hindu law is not defeated by an alleged community custom unless that custom is clearly proved, and a custom said to bar widows from adopting was not established here. An adoption made while the widow's power continues is valid, and the adopted son is treated in law as standing in the position of a natural-born son. Because adoption operates retrospectively and prevents a hiatus in the line of succession, it can defeat a reversionary claim to a jivai grant that has not become indefeasible. The adopted son was therefore entitled to possession.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the widow had power to make a valid adoption to her deceased husband despite the alleged custom of the community; (ii) Whether the subsequently adopted son could defeat the alleged immediate reversion of the jivai grant to the grantor's estate and claim possession.

Issue (i): Whether the widow had power to make a valid adoption to her deceased husband despite the alleged custom of the community.

Analysis: The alleged custom prohibiting widows from adopting was treated as a departure from Hindu law and required clear proof. The evidence did not establish such a custom. Under Hindu law, a widow's power to adopt is not dependent on her inheriting her husband's estate, and an adoption made while the power is still subsisting is valid.

Conclusion: The widow had power to make a valid adoption, and the adoption of the appellant was valid.

Issue (ii): Whether the subsequently adopted son could defeat the alleged immediate reversion of the jivai grant to the grantor's estate and claim possession.

Analysis: An adopted son is, for legal purposes, placed in the same position as a natural-born son, and an adoption has retrospective effect so that there is no hiatus in the continuity of the line. The reversion of the grant was therefore not treated as absolute and immediate so as to defeat an adoption made within the period during which the widow's power remained exercisable. The adopted son was entitled to take the property as against the reversionary claim.

Conclusion: The adoption defeated the plaintiff's reversionary claim, and the appellant was entitled to possession.

Final Conclusion: The decree of the High Court was set aside and the plaintiff's suit stood dismissed, with the appellant succeeding on the substantive issue of adoption and title.

Ratio Decidendi: A valid adoption by a widow, made while her power to adopt continues, operates retrospectively and may defeat a reversionary claim that has not become indefeasible under Hindu law.

---