Mental sufferings of a husband from his earstwhile wife
SSng Aulakh
(Querist) 07 July 2013
This query is : Resolved
A can complaint /claim compensation for the mental sufferings and ill treatment given to him by the women who is very rich now.
Adv Archana Deshmukh
(Expert) 07 July 2013
1. NO
2. NO
When the wife is remarried now, she cannot claim any maintainance from her pervious husband nor can she claim any share in his property. The daughters can claim right only in the ancestral property of the father, however, if the property that he possess is his self acquired one then, the daughters also cannot claim anything during the lifetime of the father. However, if the daughters have started earning then the father can now claim maintainance from them!
ajay sethi
(Expert) 07 July 2013
the wife after divorce has remarried . she is not entitled to any maintenance now . you have not mentioned whether the daughters who are in their twenties are working or not . what are the qualifications of the daughters?
A should not file any claim /compensation against hos ex wife . with great diffculty he has managed to start a new life . no sense in raking up old wounds .
Rajendra K Goyal
(Expert) 07 July 2013
Agree with the advise of Adv Archana ji and Ajay Sethi ji, nothing more to add.
SSng Aulakh
(Querist) 07 July 2013
How much compensation father can claim from the daughters.
Is father entitled for any compensation from his previous wife for causing damage to his health and service carrier.
prabhakar singh
(Expert) 07 July 2013
The ex wife is not entitled to maintenance
after remarriage even if she had no source of her own income.
Daughters of ex husband can claim maintenance from him till they are not married or without their own earning.
Ex father can claim maintenance, if unable,
from earning daughters.
Daughters can claim share in ancestral coparcenary properties in hands of father.
Daughters can not claim share in self acquired properties of father unless he dies intestate about those properties.
NOW b. is legally an interesting question to consider and discuss.
Advocate Archana answered it in negative perhaps a bearing in her mind that we do not have any legislated law in this regard
and that is true.
Mr.Sethi suggested to avoid without falling in discussion a claim of that kind can or can not be made.Perhaps in his subconscious mind claim was maintainable,albeit with not clarity.
Mr.Goyal was tired to think anything more.
Some time i too get so.
So the slate is clean for me.We do not have any legislated law to deal the subject.But the aspect is quite interesting in law of TORT where of late it began to be recognized under category of INTENTIONAL INFLICTION MENTAL DISTRESS(IIMD)OR INTENTIONAL INFLICTION EMOTIONAL DISTRESS
(IIED).
The rationale behind it's origin is assualt
where no compensation was allowed unless the threat of battery was imminent.Where common case would be a future threat of harm that would not constitute common law assault YET IT WOULD CAUSE MENTAL OR EMOTIONAL HARM TO THE RECIPIENT. TO COVER WITH THIS KIND OF INJURY IIED OR IIMD HAS BEEN RECOGNIZED.It allows a victim of emotional distress to receive compensation in situations where he or she would otherwise be barred from compensation
under the common law form.
In past courts were reluctant to accept a tort for emotional harm for fear of opening a wide door to frivolous claims. The Irish courts recognized it first repudiating RAIL ROAD case.
As to implement this short of a right defendant's intent is immaterial.A reckless disregard with possibility of causing emotional distress would be sufficient to award the claim.The conduct of defendant must be heinous and intolerable in a civilized society.It is also known as TORT OF OUTRAGE TO INCLUDE THAT CONDUCT OF DEFENDANT MUST BE SUCH THAT IT WOULD CAUSE
A REASONABLE PERSON TO EXCLAIM Outrageous!IN RESPONSE .THE CONDUCT SHOULD BE CONTINUEING,WITH A PATTERN WHERE VICTIM WAS VULNERABLE AND DEFENDANT KNEW IT OR THE DEFENDANT WAS EMPOWERING OR DEFENDANT OWED A FIDUCIARY DUTY MAY BE THE BASIS OF CLAIM.
THE CONDUCT OF DEFENDANT MUST CAUSE THE emotional distress.Suffering of plaintiff emotional disorder should be severe,lack of productivity or mental disorder certified by Doctor in area could be its' prove.A decree of divorce awarded on ground of cruelty to plaintiff ultimately falling in mental distress can also be a circumstantially strong proof in my opinion.
QUANTUM of compensation would be assessed not on the financial capacity of the defendant but on the basis of losses suffered at financial and emotional level.
Then i can say lawyers in India should encourage such suits in appropriate cases although delay in disposal is a big hurdle.
Adv Archana Deshmukh
(Expert) 07 July 2013
@Capt Sukhdev Singh ji,
1. what percentage of share from father's ancestral property the two girls from his previous wife will be entitled, The girls are working abroad and are NRIs?
-- It should be seen first of all whether the properties are really ancestral or not. If they are ancestral and you are governed by mitakshara law then, your mother, 2nd wife will also be entitled to a share in the ancestral properties along with you and your 2 daughters.
2. How much compensation father can claim from the daughters.
-- No compensation but you can claim maintainance depending upon the income of your daughters. Also in order to claim maintainance the father should be unable to maintain himself from his own income and properties.
3. Is father entitled for any compensation from his previous wife for causing damage to his health and service carrier.
-- Can the father prove in the court of law that the damage to the health and service is directly attibutable to the acts of the wife after so many years of divorce and seperation...??? If you are sure then, consult a local lawyer with all facts.
Adv Archana Deshmukh
(Expert) 07 July 2013
@ Prabhakar Singh sir,
I do not think any action for inflicting emotional pain to the querist can sustain a tortous liability case when filed in 2013 when the divorce was obtained in 1990 and the wife remarried in 2000 itself.. If the husband could not handle this stress of desertion by wife (the ground for divorce was desertion and not cruelty..) and went into depression, I don't think Indian courts would award him damages after so many years.... so i did not find it appropriate to suggest him to go for compensation though he specifically asked about compensation.
