As per case facts, the plaintiff filed a suit for declaration of being the adopted son of Late Papa Rao, claiming an adoption ceremony occurred in his childhood and an ... adoption deed was registered many years later. The defendants challenged this, stating the adoption was not valid under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, as the plaintiff was above 15 years at the time of the deed registration, and the ceremony was not properly proven. The trial court allowed the suit, which led to this appeal. The question arose whether the adoption of the plaintiff was valid and legally sustainable according to the provisions of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, given the alleged age of the adoptee, the timing of the deed registration, and the contradictory witness testimonies regarding the adoption ceremony. Finally, the High Court determined that the plaintiff failed to discharge the heavy burden of proving a valid adoption in accordance with the Act. The court noted significant inconsistencies in the witnesses' accounts of the give and take ceremony, including the season it took place and the absence of named community members. Furthermore, the adoption deed was registered significantly later than the alleged adoption date, and no prior documents supported the adoption. The High Court concluded that the trial court's reliance on the registered deed without admissible evidence of a valid ceremony was erroneous, leading to the setting aside of the trial court's judgment and decree.