LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Jamai Of Law (propra)     07 December 2010

Int. Mait Sec24:Capability vs Capacity to Pay..Very Imp Issu

The law talks about "current capacity (as a ground reality) to earn and pay from that" not  "envisaged or opined capability, by the Hon Court,  to earn and pay from that"

 

 

Concept of capability can't be judged by Court or anybody else except that  person who, in reality, to convert the capability ino capacity.

 

 

Hon Court's inflated opinion about a person's capability has merely a "motivational/ encouragement " value and nothing more!!!! Hon Judiciary is making a person's past record.......as a burden!!! although the past track record has lost the relevance in 'current context'

 

hon Court may "envisage the capability of the person taking into account the previous track record" but it is error prone..because judiciary is not a "job recruiter or Job giver or HR manager"

 

If the job Giver says that individual has capability to earn and actualy creates that person a job/employment...then only one is liable to make opinions about other's capability.

 

Hence maint. related judgements and figures of maint arrived using "envisaged capability of a person to earn and pay out of earings"  is erroneous.

 

This is a compititive world

 

  

Example: 

 

It's like "some ex-cricketer 's  wife going to court and saying that............ my husband had capability like Tendulkar and his initial track record better than tendulkar...he scored three centuries consecutively in debut...which even tendulkar didnit do......hence whether my hubby maintains the position in team or not!!!........it should be envisaged as his capability and earnings in 8 digits............and He be made to give me a hude maint irespective of his current ground reality/capacity !!!!.................that he is working as a coach of mohalla team...and earning peanut!!!"

 

If the that ex-cricketer had the capability....then he would have been the most happy and more than pleased to be in the national team and pay maint from his 8 figure earnings!!!!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Learning

 4 Replies

Vishwa (translator)     07 December 2010

Thank you Jamai, for your very interesting and useful comments. In this very community, I have come across  physically challenged persons being ordered to pay maintenance. On the other hand, even professionally qualified and earning ladies become eligible for maintenance.


A reasonable solution would be for the Supreme Court to lay down guidelines on this matter for nation-wide application.

Greetings and do continue the good work.

Vishwa

manjit kalra (system eng)     07 December 2010

jamai ji aapka overnight kya ho gaya , aap feminist doctor the , suddenly kya aapne s*x change ka operation karwa liya?

1 Like

Jamai Of Law (propra)     08 December 2010

Manjit ji,

 

naaaa ji naaa........galat fehmi mein na rahiyo...........................

 

Byyy and large...................... ladki yo ke saaath....khilawaaad hi hota dikhata hai.......paaaaarrrr kuch kudiyan nalayak bhi hoti hai .....................................unhe sabak sikhana bhi jarooori hai!!!

 

Bhaskar for SOCIAL JUSTICE (Legal & Social Activist)     15 December 2010

 

Pre-neputal agreement should be made legal so husband and wife are aware before hand what they are going to get or loose if they part there ways and they should be allowed to take divorce on the terms mentioned in the agreement without going to court. 

 

MAXIMUM LIMIT OF MAINTENANCE AMOUNT BE FIXED IN THE ACT ITSELF TO STOP ITS MIS-USE

 

THERE MUST BE STRICT PENAL PROVISIONS FOR PETITIONER AND ADVOCATES FOR FILING FALSE CASES.IT WILL REDUCE LARGE NUMBER OF FALSE CASES. AS PER STATATICS 95% DOWRY/ DOMESTIC VIOLANCE CASES ARE FALSE.ONCE JUDGES START PUNISHING THOSE INVOLVED IN SUCH CASES THERE WILL BE SEA CHANGE.

 Dowry law, Hindu Marriage law, Domestic violence Act etc. must be made equal for both husband and wife. Lacs of husband are suiciding because of these biased laws.

If husband has a duty to maintain his wife then he must have some rights also and if wife has right of maintenance then she must have some duties also.

 

The government of India who has enacted this type of illogical law has on its own part giving this type of maintenance/allowance etc. to citizens of India if they don’t have any earning/job etc. NO not at all.

 

In NAREGA they are just giving guarantee of work for 100 days and wages for the days worked so this should also be applicable to husband and wife also.

 

This blackmailing by wife's must be stopped forthwith.

 

 

 

 

 

 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register