Husbands Forum

Dear Thripathi Ji

The Daughters are rightly equated for the property rights with sons !

The Traditional family  compliances  & other obligationsShould also be equally shared by daughters even after marriage also

Your suggestion for rights of husband in father in laws proerty - it is good anology But How ?when D-  get proerty in  her fatehr property through D only the husband should aske for proerty rights

The Paternal  side ancestral proerty is only the ancestral proerty for sons   and daughters

Any property from maternal relation is not  ancestral proerty of sons  and duaghters - it is the mother exclussive proerty  till her life time - Why can not be this  treatd as ancestral proerty as that of the paternal ancestral proerty ? ( Sec 14 / Sreedhan /acquired from mother side and other sources  etc implicatiosn  ! )

Sir,

The property rights are equal for both male and felmale as per the Hindu Successation Act. The both male died intestate and female died intastate the property disolving upon the Heirs equally.

The husband is getting property if a female died intestate at the same time the widow is getting the property of husband died intestate. How ever the childeren are entitled for the ancisistor property.

The property rights are one of the area- where law has given almost equal rights to men and women (except succession of married women property through her father). However, property is not the only issue in marrige. Further these succession laws work when on party dies- the problem is when both are surviving.

Apart from property there are thousands of other issues- maintenance, child custody, children upbringing, household work, matrimonial home, whether parents will live together etc. etc. The law says couple should decide these issues by mutual discussion. Divorce is possible through mutual discussion (mutual consent). When a matter goes to court, the court ask the parties to settle issues through mutual discussion and compromise decree is passed. In reality marriage is a contract.

The fundamental problem is that the law is not ready to accept this reality. The law is not ready to accept that marriage is a contractual relation and can best be served if there is a contract before marriage. The contract of marriage can be registered and will be useful if any marital dispute arose. Law should promote contractual marriage. 

Dear friends, now a days joint family structure is becoming outdated. it appears that in near future it will be called a concept of the past. Further, wives are arguing , why they should live in husband’s family and why not husband should live with her parents.

After death of husband the wife gets inheritance in his property. But after wife’s death  husband can claim nothing in her paternal family. Moreover, when wife has no brothers and after marriage she along with her husband lives with her parents and dies issueless, what are rights of husband there? What is result of his sacrifices and loyalty? Was the place better than a hotel room   for him, which he has to check out just after his wife’s death ?

Dear rajesh ji ! I agree and appreciate your views!

Dear Rajesh Kumar  !

I agree with you , proerty is not  only the  issue in Family & marriage & Joint Family  !                Welfare  of the Family as a Unit  and its obligations  are more concnerned , now a days  there is  no such attitude  even to the elder family members  also ! after a period  of  10 years what would be the changes ! we have  to  waitr and see the Future !  Now a days ,  Marriage relations  are being  concluded as per pre understadings  ( agreements ) though not as you narrated .

Contractual marriage is a reality- if this is accepted and pre marriage contract is given weightage in the court, the institution of marrige may survive sor some more time.

There is a study as to why abused husbands do not leave their wife, quote,

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference "From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention."

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents--researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its "men as perpetrators/women as victims" conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

When discussing male victims of domestic violence on the radio, I'm often asked "Why don't they just leave?" My response has always been that they are in a difficult Catch-22:

They can't leave their wives because this would leave their children unprotected in the hands of an abuser. If they take their children, they can be arrested for kidnapping, and in any case when they're found, the children will be taken away and given to the mother. Moreover, they would probably lose custody of their children in the divorce anyway, again leaving their children in harm's way.

Denise Hines, Ph.D. is a research assistant psychology professor at Clark University and a research associate at the Family Research Laboratory and Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire. At the conference, Dr. Hines gave a presentation based on her study of this issue. What options do abused men have? And when they don't leave their wives, why not?

Hines' study included 302 heteros*xual men, ages 18 to 59, who had been in a relationship lasting at least one month within the previous year, had been physically assaulted by their female partners within the previous year, and had sought outside assistance/support.  The median age of the abused men was 40, and the median age of their abusive female partners was 38.  The relationships had lasted on average a little over eight years, and 73% of them had minor children.  About two-thirds were married, separated, or divorced.

Hines found that there were many different answers to the question "Why not leave her?" These included: "marriage is for life," love, "I think she'll change," "not enough money," "nowhere to go," "embarrassed others will find out," "she threatened suicide," and "she threatened to kill someone else."

However, the biggest reason why these study respondents said they did not leave their wives or female partners was that they were "concerned about the children."  Of these, the overwhelming majority thought that if they left their abusive partners, they may "never see their children again." One explained, "I was advised that if I leave, I would hurt my chances of gaining custody of the children in the long run."

Many also feared that if they left their abusive partners, the partners would use the legal system against them.  One abused man explained:

She has promised to lie and accuse me of physical abuse against her, s*xual abuse of our daughter, if that helps her win custody.

Unfortunately, we know that such tactics are often effective.  Another abused man responded:

She threatened to ruin me financially, ruin my professional reputation (we worked together), lock me out of the house, and tell the police anything she wants to tell them." Unquote.

https://wemen.us/articles/views/549-study-examines-why-abused-men-dont-leave-their-wives.html

 

Mr Rajesh Your message clearly projecting the situation  !

Kindly see this news also:

Bangalore: On Independence Day, a group of men will meet in Shimla and make a plan for "freedom" from "harassment" by their wives.

"On Independence Day we will raise the issue of freedom and dignity of harassed husbands. More than 100 men, representatives of 30,000 other harassed husbands from across the country, will converge at a day-long meeting to come up with strategies to take on their wives," Anil Kumar, president of the Save Indian Family Foundation (SIFF), told IANS.

Bangalore-based NGO SIFF, along with another NGO CRISP (Children's Rights Initiative for Shared Parenting), in partnership with Maharashtra's Purush Suraksha Sanstha and Uttar Pradesh's Pathi Paramesh Kendra have organised the event.

"All the four groups are working for equal rights for men and women in India. We feel that in many instances, the Indian law is biased when it comes to husbands, as it often favours the wives. Be it in the case of custody of children for divorced couples or false allegations of domestic violence and dowry harassment, the law generally takes the side of women, without listening to the side of men," said Kumar.

"However, we would like to clarify one thing. We're no women haters. This is about equal rights of both men and women," said Kumar Jahgirdar, founder of CRISP.

In order to prove that harassment of husbands was prevalent, Kumar cited the latest report of SIFF on suicide rate of men across India.

"Around 1.2 lakh harassed husbands in India have committed suicide in last four years," SIFF's president claimed.

The suicide figures were collected by SIFF from the National Crime Records Bureau.

"This is an alarming number. Our fight is against such wives and for justice to the harassed husbands. In fact, husbands committing suicide because of harassment is double the number of wives committing suicide in the country," the founder of CRISP said.

Some of the demands to be raised at the Shimla convention by the husbands' group include a separate men's welfare ministry on the lines of the women and child welfare ministry, equal taxation for men and women, change in inheritance laws, amendment to the domestic violence prevention law, and mandatory joint custody of children for divorced couples.

"We're meeting at Shimla, not to draw a gender dividing line. We want to discuss a social issue and find solutions as the country is seeing a large number of divorcees," said Virag Dhulia, a senior member of SIFF.

"We'll also demand pre-litigation counselling before grant of divorce, an end to police brutalities and judicial reforms to help address the social issues."

According to data available with SIFF and CRISP, on an average 20-25 cases of divorce are filed every day in Delhi, Mumbai and Bangalore.

A total of 9,000 divorce cases were filed in Delhi, 7,500 in Mumbai and 5,000 cases in Bangalore in 2008.

The figures were collected from family courts in the three Indian metros.

If harassed husbands are blaming their wives for failed marriages, women rights activists have a different take on rise in divorce rates across India.

"There are reasons galore for the rise in divorce cases. Urbanisation and increasing violence against women and financial stability of both husband and wife, to name a few," Dona Fernandes, a member of women rights' group Vimochana, told IANS.

"Today's empowered women are refusing to follow the traditional diktats of Indian marriages. Marriage is the biggest form of displacement for any woman as she has to shift from her home (natural habitat) to her husband's home.

"It is the wife who is supposed to adjust. But today's financially strong women are not ready to take undue pressure on their individual existence and thus marital discords are bound to increase," said Fernandes.

I disagree, dont think law is the problem but its execution by the investigating agencies, law enforcers is an issue. Though i do agree it should bring in some checks that enforcers do not let it get misused.

please ignore my message i was to reply in a different thread by mistake posted here