Can anyone throw some light on this question

Originally posted by : D Seikhar G
	Husband says he doesn't want to live with her and wife files a case she wants to live with him? Marriage works when both want to live together! Maybe, the laws are more intriguing than I thought! Can experts please throw the light on the rationality of these two cases running parallely as opposed to being clubbed? What happens when one court grants divorce and other grants RCR? If court can't force each other to cohabit then why court just prolong the divorce cases when the petitioner is hell bent not to live with the respondent?"Plz expert's share your views"

One court grants RCR???? N do what? Tie husband to the wife's feet??? One court grants divorce? Its laughable. Your question does not make any sense. But one does, the wife will tell I want husaband he is my rubberband, I want him to be in my hair in my pony tail. But then such cases can only be termed as GHODA HAIN MAIDAAN HE.

sir, how these question's doesn't make any sense, if RCR and divorce both are different cases then they will get two diffrenet decision's. It's fate of husband if he win's divorce and looses RCR ,so in such strange case what ill be the procedure.

Here,Iam asking why court prolong the divorce cases when it can't force anybody to live each other.Don't this mean simply waste of time and money? if one partner will not live at anycost then what is the purpose of not giving divorce and one is left only to run from HC to SC.Does this make any sense?

Originally posted by : D Seikhar G
	sir, how these question's doesn't make any sense, if RCR and divorce both are different cases then they will get two diffrenet decision's. It's fate of husband if he win's divorce and looses RCR ,so in such strange case what ill be the procedure. Here,Iam asking why court prolong the divorce cases when it can't force anybody to live each other.Don't this mean simply waste of time and money? if one partner will not live at anycost then what is the purpose of not giving divorce and one is left only to run from HC to SC.Does this make any sense?

Of course, courts and the judges and chief justice's do not have brains to even think about this smaal but very important fact.

Such a pity !

I have already started praying the Almighty that let him put some buddhi aka brains in the heads of these judges who dont have brains and that let each and every judge finish divorce cases within a month or two!

Join me in prayer ladies and gentlemen !

If the fact that both have filed a case against each other for joining/separating in two different courts and both have not disclosed their respective cases before the courts, how can you expect the courts to come to know about two different cases concerning the same party over the same issue but different subject are being tried simultaneously, the judgments obtained so in both the cases amount to fraud played by both the parties defrauding the court by colluding with each other which is not permissible under the law.     

divorce - RCR both r decided on merits

@ querist fortunately our laws are not all that bad.

CPC sec 10 will grant stay on later filed case, when cases are running( between rcr and divorce).

  CPC sec 11 puts a bar on court to hear another case after one has been decided (between rcr and divorce).

However these sections need to be explicitly invoked, in time.

regards ASHOK