J. N. BHATT, J. ( 1 ) ADMIT. Service is waived in so far as the Respondent No. 2 is concerned by learned Advocate Mr. J. A. Adeshra. The appellant has deleted the respondent No. 1 as he is dead. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances and as it is an adoption involving an element of urgency it is taken up for final hearing today itself upon joint request made by the learned Advocates appearing for the parties Both these appeals practically involved identical questions and therefore they are being disposed of by this common judgment ( 2 ) THE appellants are husband and wife in both the applications who submitted two applications before the District Court at Kheda Nadiad for adopting minor Vanita and Purnima as their adopted daughters and for obtaining necessary declarations in that behalf under the provisions of Hindu Maintenance and Adoption Act 1956 Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act 1956 and under Guardian and Wards Act 1956 ( 3 ) THE opponents in both the applications were also husband and wife original applicant No. 1 and original opponent No. 1 in both the applications are brothers and original applicant No. 2 and original opponent No. 2 are the respective wives. The parties are Hindus and their marriage took place as per Hindu religion and custom of their caste The opponent couple have four daughters out of which two daughters namely Vanita and Purnima were taken as adoptive daughters because of deep love and affection towards them since their birth by the applicants On 15. 1. 1988 the adoption ceremony as per the custom of their caste and religion was performed at Anand. Later on a registered Adoption Deed was executed on 19. 12. 1990. The applicants- couple is staying at United States of America for the service purpose since last many years and they have no child Therefore they want to take adopted daughters along with them Accordingly they applied for the Passport but they wore directed to obtain a legal declaration to the said effect from the Court Under these circumstances the applications were made before the District Court by the applicants ( 4 ) THE opponents were served with notice general special notices were issued even in the newspapers No one resisted and opposed the claim of the applicants made in the applications Thus no objections were filed. However learned District Judge raised the issues The applicants relied on the evidence of Shri Bhikhabhai Ambalal Patel and a copy of one Adoption Deed. ( 5 ) UPON appreciation of the facts and circumstances in both the applications the learned District Judge found that the applicants are not entitled to declaration as prayed for He also found that it is not in the interest of minor daughters to declare the applicants as their adoptive parents. The bona fides were also found doubtful The learned District Judge also observed that there was no evidence to show that the Passport Officer has demanded such a declaration It was also held that the registered Adoption Deed is not proved Under these circumstances both the applications came to be dismissed on 26th February 1992 Hence these two appeals ( 6 ) PRIMA facie this Court is of the opinion that there is no substance in both the appeals and there is no material which would warrant the interference of this Court However the learned Advocate for the appellants contended that the requisite documentary evidence could not be produced and proved as they were under the belief that the evidence of grandfather will be sufficient in absence of any objections from any quarter Secondly the original registered Adoption Deed was not returned from the office of the Registrar of Documents and therefore it could not be produced and proved The witnesses could not be examined and other evidence could not be led for unfortunate reasons and therefore it is seriously contended that looking to the peculiar facts and circumstances the matters may be remanded to the District Court for fresh trial after permitting the parties to lead the further evidence. ( 7 ) HAVING regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances emerging from the record of the present appeals and having heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parties there appears to be a fit and appropriate case to remand the matters to the Trial Court for fresh trial in accordance with law after permitting the parties to lead further evidence if they so desire without entering into the merits of other aspects in the matter. ( 8 ) IN the result both the original applications are remanded to the District Court (Trial Court) for Fresh trial in accordance with law after permitting the parties to adduce evidence in support of their claim made in their applications. The Trial Court is directed to dispose it of as early as possible in view of the urgency in the matter and to adjudicate upon the matters in accordance with law without being influenced by the fact that some observations are made in this judgment. Both the appeals therefore shall stand partly allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs. Appeals Partly Allowed. .