Stridhan
dev kapoor
(Querist) 05 October 2012
This query is : Resolved
In dealing a case before the criminal court I am facing difficulty to convince the Hon'ble Judge that Gifts made to the bride by groom's relatives at the time of marriage or immeduiately before or after it are NOT items to be included in ther definition of STRIDHAN.Could anyone please highlight the law on this most important qn asked the juidge here time & again ?
Regards
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 05 October 2012
academic query.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 05 October 2012
Academic or non academic is another factor,the fact is that this idiot could not
follow you?
ajay sethi
(Expert) 05 October 2012
in general, stridhan is defined as that portion of a woman’s wealth over which she alone has the power to sell, gift, mortgage, lease or exchange — whole or in parts.
Besides the ornaments and trousseau given at marriage, stridhan also includes all the gifts of money, property, jewellery and so on received by the woman before, during and after marriage from her family, her husband’s family, friends and even strangers.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 05 October 2012
case of Pratibha Rani V. Suraj Kumar the Supreme Court tried to arrive at a definition of “Stridhan” by enlisting the following exchanges as constituting stridhan
(ii) gifts made before the nuptial fire
(iii) gifts made at the bridal procession, i.e. while the bride is being led from her residence of her parents to that of her husband.
(iv) Gifts made in token of love, that is, those made by her father-in-law and mother-in-law and those made at the time of the bride making obeisance at the feet of elders.
(v) Gifts made by the father of the bride
(vi) Gifts made by the mother of the bride
(vii) Gifts made by the brother of the bride.
The judgment further clarified that 3 AIR 1985 S.C 628 “The Hindu married woman is the absolute owner of her Stridhan property and can deal with it in any manner she likes .Ordinarily the husband has no right or interest in it with the sole exception that in times of extreme distress but he is morally bound to restore it or its value when he is able to do so”
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 05 October 2012
no more to add.
dev kapoor
(Querist) 06 October 2012
Thanks a lot Mr.Sethi.My thanks are fot Mr.Nanda too.
Curiosity is what ails Mr.Prabhakar Singh to select an adjective for himself "this idiot"??????????
However my all regards & wishes for Good Hlth to Mr.Prabhakar, "Take care,Sir & Hv a nice weekend".
dev kapoor
(Querist) 06 October 2012
M/s Sethi & Nanda, "Keep up,sirs".Thats good for longevity of this 'forum.....Lawyersclubindia,Interactive platform for Lawyers & Indian public".Once you chose to be 'expert' in this forum,let there be no escapism by branding questions even of 'public importance' as 'academic' & abstain from interacting & gatherin 'experts' opionion hereon.By replying you 'interact' & collectr various opinions.Law travels fast by interactions & deliberations rather than compiling in books etc.Anyways, I thank again for your cooperation.
Guest
(Expert) 06 October 2012
Of course, you can't convince a judge against the provisions of law.
Arun Kumar Bhagat
(Expert) 05 November 2012
On the point of STRIDHAN, Pratibha Rani's case is the authoritative judgment. Rightly cited by Mr.Sethi.
dev kapoor
(Querist) 07 November 2012
Thanks Mr.Bhagat,for your contribution.
Regards !
