living relationship validity

Live in relationship is valid between an unmarried man and a woman. If it is between married persons, it can become 'adultry' , an offence under IPC if complained of. Live in relation cannot be registered as of now in India. 

Que. to first replier (above) to this thread;

"Does it mean by being in possession of a man without the legitimacy of marriage, a woman enjoys the presumption that she is entitled to benefits under the Hindu Marriage Act ans or under S. 125 CrPC and is it something like a Title Suit?”

Well against above backdrop here are two main que. for you,

Que.1: Is live-in a new concept in India to attract such comment as visualised above?

Que. 2: Sir James Fitzjames Stephen, who piloted CrPC of 1872, had said the object of section 488 (then it was referred to as such) was to prevent vagrancy or its consequences. But there have been concerns in India that "palimony" may encourage adultery? What is your Lawyer(s) take on this!


PS.: I have noticed Lawyers in the LCI forum shy away from controversies and or answering such in-depth questions even if you all are not paid to answer legal questions and if you choose to remain silent I will understand. You here is contextual and not personal. 


Source to que. above Suchitra is here:-

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Re-Re-Should-a-concubine-get-maintenance-SC-to-examine-the-que--25295.asp?1=1&offset=1

What exactly do want to register? and why?

Dear Mr. TajobsIndia,

There is a straight question from Ms. Srilakshmi for which a straightforward legal answer has been given by Adv. Suchitra.

But somewhere from the blue you are raising certain issues (which you should have opened in a separate thread) and thereafter go on to say as under:

"PS.: I have noticed Lawyers in the LCI forum shy away from controversies and or answering such in-depth questions even if you all are not paid to answer legal questions and if you choose to remain silent I will understand. You here is contextual and not personal."

Yes, let me tell you for your kind information, that I sincerely believe (may be rightly or wrongly and may be with or without any basis to backup) that the Lawyers in the LCI Forum are not really shying away from controversies. According to my belief, most of the Lawyers in the LCI Forum, do not talk out of turn or do not venture out to touch a subject, unless they are as scholarly, learned, erudite and thoroughly knowledgeable as you are.  It is not shying away, but they are no where near your legal acumen even to comprehend what you say, leave alone ponder and answer your highly inquisitive, thought provoking queries, the answers if only they know would have very very far reaching consequences and ramifications.  The Lawyers in this Forum are really awe struck, dumb founded and overwhelmed by your sheer knowledge.  In fact each one of them probably envy your deep knowledge and grip over any topic that you touch.  It is quite amazing.  
 

Yes, its valid just checkout the latest SC decisions and also for giving maintenance as you must take that responsibility also.

Live in Relationship is nothing but understanding both relationship, but some people misusing this WORD not only LIVE IN – LOVE but that people never no about Love and Live in, some people say i am loving you but it is not truly loving that person, I’m telling you one thing if you LOVE tell your heart words

heart never say LIE but your mind only doing some IDEA THIS IS TRUE DONT’T LOVE IF YOU LOVE TRUST DON’T CHEAT GOOD HEART BECAUSE EVERY HEART IS VERY VALUABLE THATS WHY DON’T FEEL BAD I’M WRIGHTING MY OWN HEART THAT’S WHY

 This Link is very interesting just drive your mouse  go there and read ,you find lots of information there:

https://sakshijuneja.com/blog/2005/09/12/live-in-relationship-vs-marriage/

Many people imagine that living together before marriage resembles taking a car for a test drive. The “trial period” gives people a chance to discover whether they are compatible. This analogy seems so compelling that people are unable to interpret the mountains of data to the contrary.

Here’s the problem with the car analogy: the car doesn’t have hurt feelings if the driver dumps it back at the used car lot and decides not to buy it. The analogy works great if you picture yourself as the driver. It stinks if you picture yourself as the car, and maintenance

Above green writings is from the link(https://sakshijuneja.com/blog/2005/09/12/live-in-relationship-vs-marriage/)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

India  is  a  country,  which  is  slowly  opening  its  doors for  western  ideas  and  lifestyles  and  one  of  the most  crucial  episodes  amongst  it,  is  the  concept  of live-in  relationships.  We  can  witness  the  number  of unmarried  partners  living  together  is  scaling  high. Just  a  generation  or  two  ago,  it  was  scandalous  for an  unmarried  man  and  woman  to  live  together.

Today,  most  couples,  who  marry,  live  together  first has  gone  mainstream.  But  that  change  happened so  quickly,  it  is  no  wonder  things  are  inconsistent.  Some couples  find  living  together  is  easy.  Others find  themselves  attacked  by  angry  family  members, excluded  from  faith  communities,  baffled  by  how  to introduce  each  other  and  discriminated  against  because  they  are  not  married.  In  some places  and  situations,  unmarried  partners  can  share  a  policy  and  get  certain  legal protections;  in  other  situations,  they  are  considered  legal  strangers  with  no  rights,  even if  they  have  lived  together  for  decades. Whenever  we  think  about  live-in  relationships,  we  ask  the  question  as  to  why  do couples  believe  in  having  such  a  relationship,  then  there  are  many  answers  to  it. Research  show  that  most  couples  who  live  together  would  like  to  get  married someday,  and  within  five  years,  slightly  more  than  half  of  them  definitely  also  do. Couples  move  in  together  mainly  because  they  are  in  love  and  they  want  to  spend more  time  together.  They  also  want  to  make  sure  they  are  compatible  before  they make  a  lifetime  commitment  to  each  other.  Many  people  we  talk  to  say  they  could  not imagine  marrying  someone  if  they  had  not  lived  together  first.

The Indian Supreme Court's (SC) decision that a live-in-relationship should be treated as equivalent to marriage is set to change the dynamics of such relationships. The court's proposal was followed by similar suggestions from the National Commission for Women (NCW), which in seeking to change the definition of ‘wife' recommended that women in live-in relationships should be entitled to maintenance if the man deserts her.

What makes this proposal interesting is that despite the need to have marriages registered, Indian marriages have hinged so heavily on symbolism that even the exchange of garlands at a temple, application of the sindoor (vermilion worn by women on the forehead as symbols of matrimony) or the mangalsutra (worn around the neck) were enough to prove marriages in the country for, at least, the majority Hindu community. And this is what made deceiving an illiterate girl or her family into a fake marriage and subsequent abandonment very easy. Besides, there have been innumerable situations where the second wife/woman is often not aware of the existence of another wife until much later into the relationship; where the woman was led to believe that the man was either unmarried, divorced or widowed and went ahead with the formalities required by- or customs governing - marriage laws. The threats of exposure and stigma attached to such a relationship not only prevent women from seeking redress but very often, by extension of the same threat, are coerced into remaining in the relationship.

When the bigamy law is invoked it invariably means abandonment of the ‘other woman' who in the presence of the wife is not recognized by law; and while the wife still has avenues to seek redress (though it is often not used) in case of abandonment by the husband, the ‘other' woman is both socially and legally abandoned. Also, despite the tacit social acceptance of second marriages/second families as a right of the man in rural India or amidst the urban poor, it is only when the man dies that women in these relationships really face the brunt of society since nothing legally accords them even the status of a widow. In effect, this is the protection that the law gives such women.

Also checkout my post

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/live-in-partner-is-entitled-to-alimony-under-DVA-Considering-25506.asp

live-in partner is entitled to alimony under DVA

Considering the increasing number of live-in relationships in modern India, the Supreme Court (SC) wants the scope of the provision for maintenance under section 125 of the criminal procedure code (CrPC) expanded, so that women in such relationships do not face economic deprivation after living in a domestic set-up for years.

for a woman if she already married, should not go on live in, because her husband may complain u/s 497 of ipc. if she has no living husband - no problem, may carry on the relationship.

search privious posts of mine. you will get sufficient information.

at present it can not be registered but dv act providing some legal assistance to such couple.

well, we have got two very intelligent, sound minded rather hyper intelligent individuals here.

one is running for a free ipod....probably the most sophisticated beggar he is in this world....and quite interestingly that guy leaves unfounded and shameless remarks on the replies of a college topper.

the second guy is so frustrated from life and legal profession that he is not even aware of words he is using for other lawyers......may be he is suffering from some mental problem....

i ve reported the matter to the Admin. hope the necessary action will be taken :)

Yes, Kiran,


I read you have some issues with me?


1. What being topper or failure in Law College has to do in answering a Legal question ! I admire Suchitra since those days when she used to write ‘Student’ under her name and after completing law school I think from past 1 or 1-1/2 months she has started mentioning ‘Advocate’. It is besides the point. Simple.


2. Now, I ask you since you passed remark to me to justify by way of legal answers to the two legal questions I asked her to reply and she is also welcome on-board on same 2 que. And if you feel you have law points on this subject then let it be just me and you on subject called ‘palimony’ and its contextual far reaching reference in India on S. 125 CrPC, which is not even valid for Hindus when now Hindus have their own codified Maint. Act BTW, and I hope you understood Re. Chand Dhawan SC Judgment on codified maint. personal Laws?


3. You write another mail to Admin. now and ask him, was I ever after Ipod and THAT POST was to draw the biasness of awarding Ipod to the same member who abuses till date other member including me. You want some of that member’s abusive posts written to me, I will forward them to you since they are deleted now by the same Admin. Send me your full email ID to fwd. them.


4. Oh. In WWW there are equally competitive legal forums which have even larger database than LCI, I being professional using these options but you have none so to speak…………..bze instead of covering the law points you are creating unfound controversies with which I leave the board open to your best of understanding.

Ops.


Mr Ramchandran,

Your observation on starting a new post is quite right, yes, I should have done that. However, I admire two female adv. here; Suchitra and Archana they are superb with their one shot wholesome answers and somehow I could not resist asking the abv. two que. to Suchitra in same post just after she replied.


Well, if I come back to LCI feel that I have taken your point (suggestion) well and if not then the door is wide open for professionals so to speak……………………….just like “if you start petting an elephant then take it granted, you have to start making provisions for renovating the door wider and wider and still wider”. It is a Village saying, hope you ever heard that….....

This forum is  a very good place for people who are facing problems with the judicial system and who require quick and impartial advice on serious matters that involve their life and liberty. It seems to me that some persons are deliberately or unwittingly thwarting this essential role of the forum. These persons are simply interested in showing off their legal knowledge or lack of it by indulging in verbose posts and arguments and counter arguments, forgetting that there is often a victim in distress behind all this. This is what is called throwing out the baby with the bath water.
People should really shut up unless they are 100% sure that their comments are going to help an aggreived person.

Vishwa

Being bled to death by lawyers, courts and their touts

Respected members of LCI, 

The time has come for me to answer the question why my answers will be to the point and not elaborate. I confess I really do not have time to research on the queries and so, I make a point that I answer them just enough to clarify their doubt. I think I am right in doing so as it gives me satisfaction of helping people who are pondering seeking remedy available within my limitations. I am still a student of law as I am doing my Masters now apart from working in a law firm, and I am always open to correct myself whenever I go wrong in giving advises.

@ tajobsindia Sir,

I would like to first comment on the live in relationships as under :

The recognition of the live-in relationship would allow a ‘mistress’ to get the status of a legally married wife in all matters, including share in property, inheritance, maintenance.Nevertheless, this essentially goes contrary to the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which has no provision for a second wife among Hindus. Moreover, once live-in couples invoke the proposed amended law, it would mean an admission on their part that there is a ‘second wife’ - which is again not permitted as per the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The very idea of cohabitation is that the partners don’t want commitments and responsibilities that come with marriage. In that case, we cannot expect social and legal bond to a relationship that by definition can be terminated at will. Any decision to bring change in Section 125, CrPC with regard to live - in - relationship invites amendments in other laws as well including law of evidence, succession, adoption, bigamy, marriage etc. Therefore, if even inspite of no relationship in the eyes of law (marriage), one has to be made liable to pay maintenance after a reasonable time period.