One Night Stand cannot be considered as Marriage under Hindu Law

The physical relationship between a man and woman by choice or by chance or by accident cannot be termed as “marriage” under Hindu Laws.

It was also held by this Court that a baby born out of this relationship will have no rights over the father’s property if no marriage can be proved in the court.

Justice Mridula Bhatkar said that “Broadly either customary solemnisation of marriage is required or performance of legal formality is a condition precedent to label that matter relationship as a marriage. Any sexual intercourse that took place by choice or chance or by accident is not considered as marriage.”

The court does take a note of that our society is going through a sea change as to how marriage is seen in today’s scenario and as defined under Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act. It held that “In some countries, homosexual unions are  accepted as marriages, so also live-in relationships and children born within such relationships have posed as complicated issues and a challenge to legal thinkers to define the term of marriage, whether in wider or narrow meaning.”

The rights of a child are determined only on the basis of the institution of marriage even though it has been subsequently held void. In a leading case, the man had married twice. As per Hindu Laws, his second marriage was void as he has not divorced the first one. Though in the instant case the second marriage was considered void but the daughter from his second wife had legitimate rights in the share of his property. 

Article by Advocate K.P.Satish Kumar M.L. leading divorce lawyer in Chennai

for free legal queries call Daniel & Daniel @ 9840802218

.

Welfare of the Minor is the paramount consideration of Child Custody

The minors should not be treated as “Chattel” for claiming custody.

In the present matter, the six-year Jhanvi was staying with her father. Jhanvi’s mother deserted her husband and her young daughter on 23rd March 2012. At that time, Jhanvi was only 2- year old. Subsequently, Jhanvi’s father filed for a divorce and sought permanent custody of their daughter.

During the pendency of this above petition, Jhanvi was allowed to meet her mother twice a week and during summer and winter vacations.

Petitioner claims that her daughter was physically abused by her mother on multiple occasions. Also, her medical reports confirm that she suffered “multiple bruises, apart from tenderness over her arms, roots of nose and back” after meeting her mother on January, 28.

Again, she suffered similar injuries on February 18. Later she informed her father that she does not intend to meet her mother as she use to hit and pinch her.

The petitioner pleads that since his daughter has been physically tortured and traumatized by her mother, she should not be allowed to meet her mother. At the same time, he also requested the court to get his daughter evaluated by a child psychologist.  

Subsequent to the request of the petitioner, the family court appointed Dr. Harish Shetty who is a  psychiatrist as Jhanvi’s psychologist. However, the petitioner vehemently objected to this as Dr. Harish was a psychiatrist and not psychologist.

Jhanvi's mother blatantly denied all the allegations and stated that Jhanvi was not with her when such incidents are claimed to have occurred.

The Bombay High Court observed that this was a clear case of child abuse and “It is well settled that welfare of minor is paramount consideration for deciding even a temporary custody of a minor. Minors cannot be treated as chattel for claiming custody.”

Considering Jhanvi’s apprehension and looking into her safety and well-being, the court has stayed the order passed by Family Court which permitted her mother to meet her.
Article by Advocate K.P.Satish Kumar M.L. leading child custody advocate in Chennai
for legal queries contact Daniel & Daniel @ 9840802218

Instant and Immediate Divorce in India

Supreme court in land mark Judgment has waived a 6 months cooling period in the case of Mutual consent divorce. It held Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act is not mandatory but directory, it will be open to the Court to exercise its discretion in the facts and circumstances of each case where there is no possibility of parties resuming cohabitation and there are chances of alternative rehabilitation. It has also said that in conducting such proceedings the Court can also use the medium of video conferencing and also permit genuine representation of the parties through close relations such as parents or siblings where the parties are unable to appear in person for any just and valid reason as may satisfy the Court, to advance the interest of justice. Section 13B(1) relates to jurisdiction of the Court and the petition is maintainable only if the parties are living separately for a period of one year or more and if they have not been able to live together and have agreed that the marriage be dissolved. Section 13B(2) is procedural. He submitted that the discretion to waive the period is a guided discretion by consideration of interest of justice where there is no chance of reconciliation and parties were already separated for a longer period or contesting proceedings for a period longer than the period mentioned in Section 13B(2). Thus, the Court should consider the questions: i) How long parties have been married? ii) How long litigation is pending? iii) How long they have been staying apart? iv) Are there any other proceedings between the parties? v) Have the parties attended mediation/conciliation? vi) Have the parties arrived at genuine settlement which takes care of alimony, custody of child or any other pending issues between the parties? The Court must be satisfied that the parties were living separately for more than the statutory period and all efforts at mediation and reconciliation have been tried and have failed and there is no chance of reconciliation and further waiting period will only prolong their agony. On such cases when a party make a petition to dispense the 6 months cooling period, then the court will use its discretionary power to grant mutual consent divorce as early after a week time. The Author Mr.K.P.Satish Kumar M.L. is the leading divorce lawyer in Chennai. Talk to the top divorce lawyer and send your queries to our whattsapp service No.9

840802218. 

கணவன் தன்னுடைய 2வது மனைவியை தன்னோடு சேர்த்து வாழ மனு தாக்கல் செய்ய முடியாது.

முதல் மனைவி உயிரோடிருக்கும் போது இரண்டாவது திருமணம் செய்து கொண்ட கணவன் தன்னுடைய 2வது மனைவியை தன்னோடு சேர்த்து வாழ (Restitition Conjugal Rights) உத்தரவிடும் படி குடும்ப நீதிமன்றத்தில் மனு தாக்கல் செய்ய முடியாது. அவ்வாறு செய்யப்பட்ட திருமணம் இந்து திருமணச் சட்டம் பிரிவு 5ல் கூறப்பட்டுள்ள நிபந்தனைகளுக்கு முரணானதாகும். இந்து திருமணச் சட்டம் பிரிவு 11ன் படி அத்தகைய திருமணங்கள் சட்டப்படி செல்லாத திருமணமாகும். எனவே 2வதாக திருமணம் செய்து கொள்கிற போது முதல் மனைவி உயிரோடு இருந்தால் 2வதாக திருமணம் செய்து கொண்ட மனைவியின் மீது இந்து திருமணச் சட்டம் பிரிவு 9 அல்லது 13 ன் கீழ் கணவர் எந்த ஒரு மனுவையும் தாக்கல் செய்ய முடியாது Talk to the Top Divorce Lawyer in Annanagar For queries and appiontment our whattsapp service No.9840802218. Talk to the Leading Divorce Lawyer in Chennai @ 9551716256 

Women’s Common Mistake in Divorce # 2

Most common  mistakes done by the women’s they go behind the idea of non-professional’s such as friends, neighbors and relatives. If you pursue towards divorce then you should ask advise from the experts who can deal the divorce problems very well.  If  they should not just go for a free consultation and its better if they can avoid it, as they will get better legal advice if they pay for it.

Get a expertise attorney who has good knowledge and practice in family laws. Even they charge high avail the professional service, that can simplify your problems and put an end for all the divorce complications.

It is better to act with the guidance of the experienced lawyer. So women’s can tackle their husbands in the divorce war.

Article by K,P.Satish Kumar leading Divorce lawyer in India

Daniel & Daniel Helpline :- 9962999008

Women’s Common Mistake in Divorce # 1

A women things about a divorce when she feels a victim to family problems only at last. She tries to continue the institution of marriage in the hope of resolving the problems or to take it as a part of her life. Only at the extreme condition, a women feels that she need a divorce from her partner.

A women should not panic and should go online and find out everything that they need to know. They should meet a lawyer or more than one lawyer and find out what their rights are. Women should remember that they are not going to get kicked out of their home immediately just because their husband is not paying their rent or mortgage anymore and should not get intimidated into agreeing to a settlement before they are ready to.

A women should know all the legal help and that she can afford without any difficult. She should have easy axcess with her lawyers. If you want to put an to your marriage then consult the lawyers who professionally deals it.

Article by K,P.Satish Kumar leading Divorce lawyer in India

Daniel & Daniel Helpline :- 9962999008

Can Contempt lies against who withdraws Mutual Consent Petition

After signing the agreement by mutual consent to file for divorce, will either of the partner face contempt proceedings if they have any 2nd thought? That is the question the Delhi HC asked recently while referring to a batch of 8 separate divorce petitions to a larger bench. There have been contradictory views in earlier rulings Justice Manmohan expressed some serious doubts on the practice of the courts hauling up spouses for contempt if they fail to honour their earlier stand of divorce by mutual consent during the 6 month “cooling off” period. Section 13 B of the Hindu Marriage Act allows for ‘divorce by mutual consent’ in a 2 step process. The 1st motion of divorce can be filed by a couple if they haven’t been living together for at least one year. After this, the law mandates a “waiting period or cooling off period” of 6 to 18 months. When this period ends, the spouses can either withdraw their consent, & attempt to continue their married life, or file the 2nd motion for divorce, after this their separation is finalized. Even in the case of a “contested divorce”, where there’s a criminal complaint filed by either of the spouses or any 1 of them comes to court for a divorce against the other’s will- the couple gets a waiting period to resolve the differences. During this period of mediation, if the partners agree to the terms of getting mutual separation, then they file a plea for divorce by mutual consent. Say, a couple has filed a divorce petition under Sec. 13B(1) (divorce by mutual consent) or a motion under Section 13B(2) of the Act or both, but then 1 of them decides to change their mind in view of the option to renege/reconsider their decision of taking divorce by mutual consent under Section 13 B(2) of the Act”. the question is whether they should be held liable for contempt? It was raised before the single Bench of the Delhi High Court recently. The Apex Court, and Benches of Mumbai High Court and Delhi High Court earlier have given differing judgments on finality of agreement in the divorce mediations. In one case, the wife had refused to file the 2nd motion through mutual consent for divorce, after receiving part payment of the alimony, as she had “changed her mind” about the terms of custody for her child. The High Court had said that the “erring spouse” can’t be allowed to “take any advantage” of the option allowed in the cases of divorce by mutual consent. Citing many “contradicting judgments”, Justice Manmohan expounded that since Apex Court has held that the “consent” for divorce must “continue till date of the decree”, the right of parties to change their minds cannot be taken away. By Team Daniel & Daniel 9884883318