Mayoor Saxena vs Sarvsadharan Advocate - app — 16/2021
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 5,. Disposed: Contested--Appeal Allowed, Cross Objection Allowed on 30th March 2026.
Civil Regular Appeal - CIVIL REG. APPEAL
CNR: RJBR010017782021
e-Filing Number
-
Filing Number
427/2021
Filing Date
11-10-2021
Registration No
16/2021
Registration Date
11-10-2021
Court
DJ ADJ Baran HQ
Judge
4-ADJ II
Decision Date
30th March 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--Appeal Allowed, Cross Objection Allowed
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Mayoor Saxena
Adv. Mahaveer Prasad Jain
Respondent(s)
Sarvsadharan Advocate - app (Assistant Public Prosecutor)
PP (Public Prosecutor)
Adhishashi Abhiyanta
Hearing History
Judge: 4-ADJ II
Disposed
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
Final arguments
| Date | Purpose | Result |
|---|---|---|
| 30-03-2026 | Disposed | |
| 18-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 13-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 09-03-2026 | Final arguments | |
| 05-03-2026 | Final arguments |
Final Orders / Judgements
Court Decision Summary The court allowed the appellant's appeal and recognized Mayur Saxena as the legally adopted son of Buddhiprakash Saxena. The court found that the adoption was validly executed when the child was 5 years old, with a registered deed executed on 29-01-2014. Applying Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, which presumes compliance with legal requirements for registered adoption documents, the court determined there was no credible evidence to rebut this presumption, and thus granted the appellant's request to be recognized as the adopted son with all associated rights and benefits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Court Decision Summary The court allowed the appellant's appeal and recognized Mayur Saxena as the legally adopted son of Buddhiprakash Saxena. The court found that the adoption was validly executed when the child was 5 years old, with a registered deed executed on 29-01-2014. Applying Section 16 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, which presumes compliance with legal requirements for registered adoption documents, the court determined there was no credible evidence to rebut this presumption, and thus granted the appellant's request to be recognized as the adopted son with all associated rights and benefits. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts