A mother can include the surname of second husband to a child's name after the death of the first husband held Supreme Court in case of Akella Lalita v. Sri Konda Hanumantha Rao . In this appeal, the mother (who remarried after her first husband passed away) and the grandparents of the child's deceased biological father disagreed about the surname that should be given to the kid. In an appeal that resulted from a petition filed under Section 10 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890, the mother had petitioned the Supreme Court, appealing a ruling by the Andhra Pradesh High Court ordering the restoration of the child's surname. In terms of the child's father's name, the High Court ordered that the name of the child's biological father be listed whenever the records permit it, and the name of the mother's new husband should be listed as the child's stepfather if it is otherwise illegal. The issues of the case were:
Whether the mother, who is the child's only natural or legal guardian in the event that the child's biological father dies, has the authority to choose the child's last name ?
If the respondents did not request this remedy in their petition to the trial Court, does the High Court have the authority to order the appellant to change the child's surname?
The bench noted that the mother's status had been strengthened in the case of Githa Hariharan and Ors. vs. Reserve Bank of India and Ors., strengthening her claim to be the minor child's natural guardian under Section 6 of the Hindu Minority and Adoption Act, 1956.
The court further noted that it was nearly cruel and careless of how it would affect the child's mental well-being and sense of self-worth for the High Court to order the current husband to be listed as the child's stepfather on official records.
The court noticed that the current husband legally adopted the child through a registered adoption deed while the current petition was pending. The bench noted the following with reference to Section 12 of the Hindu Adoption & Maintenance Act, 1956 and the concept of "adoption" in the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics: "When such child takes on to be a kosher member of the adoptive family it is only logical that he takes the surname of the adoptive family and it is thus befuddling to see judicial intervention in such a matter. . While the main object of adoption in the past has been to secure the performance of one's funeral rights and to preserve the continuance of one's lineage, in recent times, the modern adoption theory aims to restore family life to a child deprived of his or her biological family",
Regarding the second issue, the bench stated that by ordering the child's surname to be changed, the High Court had gone beyond the scope of the pleadings and that these orders should therefore be revoked. The court permitted the appeal and stated: "To obviate any uncertainty it is reiterated that the mother being the only natural guardian of the child has the right to decide the surname of the child. She also has the right to give the child in adoption. The Court may have the power to intervene but only when a prayer specific to that effect is made and such prayer must be centered on the premise that child's interest is the primary consideration and it outweighs all other considerations. With the above observations the directions of the High Court so far as the surname of the child is concerned are set aside."