1) you had raised this query earlier too which had been duly replied to .

2) in the present case there is no formal deed of adoption executed by father Y in favour of F and W2.in respect of son S 5

3) however in school college records of S 5name of parents is shown as F and W2.

4)To prove valid adoption, it would be necessary to bring on records that there had been an actual giving and taking ceremony; M. Gurudas v. Rasaranjan , AIR 2006 SC 3275.

5)in addition section 11(1) of HindU adoption and Maintenance act 1956 provides that for adoption to be valid adopted father at time of taking in adoption must not have a hindu son living at the time of adoption .

6) in the present case adopted father already had a hindu son S1 from W1 and another son S 3 from W2

7) hence merely because S 5 was lving with F and w2 would not be sufficient for s 5 to be regarded as adopted son .

8) F and W2 can execute gift deed in respect of their self acquired property to any one they so desires . it is not necessary for w2 to give any share to s1 , S 3 and S 5.

9)claim of son of S1 is not valid . father and W 2 can transfer property to S 5 by gift deed even if he was not adopted out of natural love and affection

10) S 5 will have to move court to set aside gift deed executed by son of S1 in favour of his son as the S1 son had no rights on said property which had been transferred to S 5

1. It seems that there was no legal adoption of S5 by F and W2. Mere incorporation of F and W2's name as the parents of S5 in various documents does not make them his parents.

2. If F and W2 made a gift deed in favour of S5 of the properties owned by them then the gift deed would take effect. S5 has become the owner of the properties gifted to him.

3. The registration made by son of S1 in favour of his son is illegal as he could not have transferred the properties which were not owned by him. S5 should challenge the registration in the court to preserve his properties.

4. The fact that S5 is not the adopted son of F and W2 does not invalidate the gift deed made in his favour. F and W2 were within their right to gift their properties to S5. S5 should immediately go to court lest delay impairs his legal recourse.

1. There should have been an adoption deed for establishing the parental identity of S5. It is not there. So, he can not be treated as an adopted son of F & W2,

2. The owners of the property, F & W2 herein, can give his/her/their prioperty or its ahare to anybody he/she likes to,

3. The claim of S1 is valid since F & W2 have bestowed their part of property to S1 being their son, whose name is similar to S5 eho os not a biological or adopted so0m of F & W2,

4. S5 shall have to prove that he was an adopted son of F & W2, whose deed was not registered by F & W2 doe to ignorance.