nri_male (S/W Engineer) 07 December 2017

Mou terms - legal language question

Hello esteemed members,

I am the 2nd party here and my wife is 1st party in a MOU involving divorce, the girl's side changed the MOU terms from 'Old to 'New'. I am not sure what was the intent of the change here. I am in the US and girl is in India and my parents were involved while the divorce MOU terms were being negotiated.

Is there any difference between the two sentences. I just want to make sure I am not making a mistake by agreeing to something which can be opened for interpretation later on.

Old:

1st party has relinquished all her rights of maintenance for the past, present or future and right of permanent alimony from the 2nd party.

New:

The 1 st party upon the request of the 2 nd party’s parents as insisted by the 2 nd party has relinquished all her rights of maintenance for the past, present or future and right of permanent alimony from the 2 nd party.

Reply Follow

1 Replies

Vijay Raj Mahajan (Advocate) 07 December 2017

The Old version is correct. The New version gives the impression that the husband and his parents forced her to relinquish her claim of permanent alimony and maintenance which otherwise she may not have done by her own will and free consent.

The wife and her parents have very cleverly made this change in order to claim permanent alimony and maintenance later on, basis of her financial requirement and undue influence and force inflicted on her by the husband and his parent not to claim it at the time of divorce by mutual consent.

She as a divorced wife can even claim maintenance under section 125 Cr.P.C even after divorce if she has not remarried and has no source of income to maintain herself.

In short the sword of maintenance remains hanging on your head for time immemorial.

For detailed professional case discussion you may contact me:

vijaymahajan5758@gmail.com