Do matrimonial laws REALLY FAVOR WOMEN?

@ avnish & others,(esp. men against females in this thread)

nowhere did i say that all women shud goto court.i only meant women who have been wronged.i donno why i m facing personal attacks here..........

and u went upto say that all women misuse laws.atleast ur way of putting up things says so...........coz u supposedly had bad experiences..shows ur high maturity levels..

I ALSO NEVER SAID THAT YOU (MS. AISHWARYA) TOLD IT. WHY YOU TAKE IT ON YOU?

DV ACT RECTIFIED THE UNCONSTITUTIONAL STAND OF 498A

I THINK DV ACT CAN BE USED BY A MIL/SIL AGAINST HER DIL/SIL.

BUT I AM NOT SURE. ARUN JI HAVE MASTRY ON IT.

@ d.arun kumar

i was expecting to see ur lengthy reply as usual and ur tendency to ridicule the thread starter(coz i have gone  thru almost all ur threads)......in all the threads where u reply to people's posts,if u disagree with sum1,u behave as if u know everything about the world while others are fools and must eventually agree with u............and therefore u r online 24/7,obsessed with these matrimonial laws,which all indian women are misusing...

u asked me questions pointwise as if u r interviewing or cross examining me...........and that i shd come up and answer like a pupil answers to his school principal

first n foremost,i m not answerable to u.u asking me silly questions like"wot do u mean by few lucky women get justice".i donno wot explanation u need here.and then u asked me the stats of it..........

its not that if i reply to u like a student pointwise u will start supporting me morally or will start agreeing with me.....but i donno wot makes u ask all this........

just before u replied,i also pointed out few things to wich u dint reply.then y this question n answer session wid me?

if u want proofs of everything to validate that wot i say is right then everyone in this thread who starts a general discussion shud come with more than 10 solid proofs as attachments n videos of wot he's saying after getting a certificate of authenticity from some established agency so that it may be uplloaded in Lawyersclubindia,to be shown to mr. arun for his approval.............

if that be so,first u show me the proof that ur wife is in the wrong and that u  hv been a wonderful husband............prove to everyone here that u r in thr right and an innocent victim.bring as many proofs as u can.....prove that u r a genuine person.....prove u r really named d.arun kumar..................prove everything abt ur wife wrong here.just upload ur entire petition or case file here for others to see.then i will answer u....................coz ur questions are rather silly.and mind u they are deviating from the points of my very last post addressed to u and also from the point i raised in all my posts

u have hinted subtly that i just dragged my hubby for money..............fine.........now plz go thru "my contribution" in my profile page .i participated in a thread whose subject is "please advice"

it  was started by a man named mohit where he stated his sister's problem.....here i briefly stated how i was forced into a settlement after being harassed by my hubby and MIL.and u gave me a very gentle advice.as if u understud my problem v.well....................ironiaclly in my present thread,ie,do matrimonial laws really favor women,u r very argumentative with me....y this double face??

if u have reread this thread, wot do u hv to say now................ur usual attitude of giving lengthy ridiculing replies wich im sure nobody wud be interested in reading(atleast not me) or some basic maturity that lets spare women and just focus on improving the legal process for both the male n female............

PS-till now i thot u r really a harassed husband.........now after going thru many of ur threads including my own i wonder how boring n irritating people can be that they just wana argue endlessly and forcing their opinions on others that are based on their so called personal experiences....if u can be so arrogant and proud on this thread and argue with people so much even if they mean no harm to u,i wonder how much u illtreated ur wife that she left u ...............

sir u know wot.in india people take wife's harassment seriously only wen she is beaten up...else mental torture thru words,remarks etc is usually ignored.

dont think that if u dint hit ur wife(i donno if its true) u were a gud hubby.........mental emotional n psychological torture can be thru words,attitude,by showing the other person that he's wrong and i m always right(this is peculiar abt u),by showing too much domination,intruding too much into ur partner's privacy and so on.............any1 can get pissed off...........i hope u get wot i mean..................now please dont bore with ur usual silly and lengthyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy replies....

ARUN JI MANY OF YOUR FANS INCLUDING ME ENJOY YOUR REPLIES. PLEASE KEEP CONTINUING.

@arup & arun

ya arun ji please continue ur wife bashing in a separate thread where all female haters gather and spit venom on their wives n inlaws...not in a thot provoking thread like mine wich needs wise and compassionate   participants............thanks

QUOTE

where all female haters gather and spit venom on their wives n inlaws...not in a thot provoking thread like mine wich needs wise and compassionate   participants

UN QUOTE

WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT YOURSELF IS INCORRECT.

this is a democratic forum and everyone can reply to ur query.you have no right to ask anyone not to reply here. this is not a thot provoking thread, it is like adding salt to wounds of those who have suffered discrimination of these laws. so please dont be personal.thats why it was necessary to reply here. arun ji's comments please

@Aishwarya,

It is very clear from your post why u r in present state of affairs. Please dont think that ur r angel and u came from heaven. U dont have any right to go too much personal on this public forum and if u don't understand others posts just keep ur mouth shut and try to understand what others are saying.

I know the personal opinions of people do not change by just reading the posts, but this forum is mainly for those who need legal help. Many people have already answered to ur question that 'YES' matrimonial laws are really favoring women to take revenge  on in-laws and husband and there-by helping them to extract huge amounts of money from them.

It is clear that we are talking about 'FALSE ALLEGATIONS'. which is now 95% of the cases and still u r talking non-sense by comparing a woman who falsely alleged her husband and inlaws in a false 498-A case with Lord Rama and Lord Krishna.

Because of huge percentage of false cases, the true 5% cases are also viewed with Suspicion. Anyways women are able to take revenge and gain monetarily with laws favoring women but ultimately they are also loosing thier mental peace and harmony.

Somebody in this forum is saying why men are marrying again, even after facing this trauma in firts marriage. This question applies to women too. No body can live alone whole through out thier life. Human being always live with hope that things would change and he will not expect the same thing to be re-peated again.

Arun Kumar Ji,

There are many fans for you here and we always wait for your replies. Please dont stop your posts

Cheers

Kiran

@ Author of this post

1. Your title of post is only good rest matters / justification is getting personal here even by you being this post author which is not healthy sign of a self authored post in WWW.

2. You have no clue being author of a post how to moderate the replies a post generates.

3. You intentionally created a title post then created confusion among your own fellow sisters (females) and ending the post with too personal remarks involving every repliers who did not reply as to the theme of the post which as a author of a post shows your understanding / maturity level on any Laws forget matrimonial Laws and or making of a Law.

4. Now, since you have no stats / certified copies of complains of women handy / case laws / points of laws handy to rebut me you are resorting to personal remarks on my bedroom which I take as your immaturity level being a author of this post and shows what you wanted to propagate by your this title post and create further confusion among your own sisters (females) forget the opposite spouse here or there.

5. Regarding fans or no fan following my interest here is only explaining point of law in all its wordings which is required or not required is not my issue in a post and in turn get further educated for my own understanding any point of Law relating to matrimony. Readers have discretion to use control, alt and delete to any of my posts and I don’t need a certificate from you so to speak on behalf of others bze you should speak to me about yourself and not about other selves if you want my replies, others are capable to speak for themselves why speak for humanity in a generic post.


6. Now, if you own this forum / this website then delete my membership otherwise use Control / Alt. / Delete to my posts. 

7. Now last suggestion to you @ Aishwarya, moderate this thread as a neutral author and do not make personal remarks in the same post which you have authored to others. You can make personal remarks to repliers to other post not authored by you but not the same post is what a moderator does / functions as. Learn this trick otherwise your post title I still say is perhaps the most controversial and perhaps too good to be true too J

Chew above or continue as you may please to eternity. I am out of this post now because you as a author have no clue on matrimonial Laws for or against and have no clue on how to moderate a self authored thread.

Rgds.  
PS.: For other contributors here in this post - I am not interested in fan following in life so this forum having or not having any fans for me is immaterial and readers who wrote here that they are my fans please I don't like those sweet candy  All of you are welcome to rebut me with pure point of law / case laws / reasoning as per Law that is my only point and simultaneously educate me on same point of Laws I will be happy.

@ Aishwarya

I am adding on to your personal comment to me that I m having 'double face" and referring to your Please Advice thread :-)

In thread - https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Re-Pls-advice-21099.asp

Read Your post of 05 July 2010, 23:26 there

My reply of 06 July 2010, 15:17 is correct by commenting to both of you (Mohit) as "unfortunate incidence" and further gave guidence to both of you generically saying which ibid as" You can always revert back under "change of circusmstances clause" give or take after few years till then study the very Law which didnot give you desired trust in the institution"

BTW what you were expecting me to write neutrally to two same theme posts as above in Please Advise thread post subject with two families having similar situation other than above quote ! OR were you expecting me to say that both familes husband are crooks and use choiciesed language ina civilised open internet forum to make you happy, excuse me  u made a wrong remark to a gender neutral person here who wanted to help but his abv. reply is taken as something alien !

and how abv. reply is double faced here to this title post you justify yourself  :-)))))

You should have then thanked me in Please advise thread and further asked me how to claim under changed circumstances from your ex Husband who is now in overseas leaving you dry here in India ! I would have gladly gave my point of view but you missed that there and bring your personal fears and frustrations into this thread with tile post already hinted there and I knew then that one day you will create this thread.

Now enjoy a train missed is personal comment from me to you and see what difference legal logic plays in self generated threads in open WWW which is the mute point as an illustration trying to make you understand why this thread is too good but ending up like a personal gender score with no logical end.

If you still want my neutral help under "change circumstances" seek it I will openly give you very detailed help here in sperate thread for your own help which could be peer reviewed here openly with further educative replies by other Ld. members is what my purpose here is all about and which you interpret as lengthy preachings and mix my bedroom with your thread which is not required in a open self created thread. 

Now here is an ode to all women and to all men including me; to make this thread lighter onto why a wife and husband are from Venus and Mars respectively :-)))))

Illustration:

Applicant: How is the food today?
Respondent : Good. Thanks.

Applicant: (after tasting the food) but there is no salt! Perhaps I forgot. Why didn't you point it out?
Respondent: If I point out such things it may be considered as "humiliation" under DV Act Section 5 (Chapter 5) sub clause 3(a).

Applicant: Why are you talking like that! I'm your wife! Don't you love me? And stop telling me about your funny Sections and Act ... I don't know nothing about it.
Respondent: Yes, I do love you.

Applicant: I love you too. Now tell me how much do you love me?
Respondent: Well, I wish I had an answer but I could not find the quality & quantity of love in DV Act that is required to be given by husband to his wife.

Applicant: I don't know what are you talking about!! Anyway, look outside, it's raining... let's get romantic and make love!
Respondent: I would love to make love but nothing in DV Act defines the strategies, do's & don'ts of making love, including the ones required to be complied with pre, during and post lovemaking. If I attempt to even show my affection towards you it might be misconstrued as "s*xual" and "physical abuse".

Applicant: Darling !!! Don't be such a bore... and I haven't heard you calling me "honey" from long !?
Respondnet: I'm not a bore and you know that. However, being a true Indian it's my duty to abide by the laws meant to protect women. I cannot call you "honey" coz it might come under "name calling" of DV Act. You might accuse me claiming that by calling "honey" I meant that you were the home of poisonous "honey" bees!

Applicant: Was it a joke?
Respondnet: No no, it was not a joke. DV Act doesn't allow me to joke with you as joking might be taken as "ridicule".

Applicant: I think you have gone mad !! Anyway, I know how to get you back on track. You know I got a call from my ex boy friend today when you were in office !!
Respondnet: Ok.

Applicant: Ok? What ok? You used to feel jealous to know about any male calling me! I love your possessiveness towards me!
Respondnet: I'm afraid but the DV Act doesn't allow me to stop you from talking to and/or meeting anybody you want to at any time... be it your ex boy friend or your new lover, be it at our home or outside. If I try to stop you it might be taken as "prohibition or restriction to continued access to resources or facilities which you are entitled to use or enjoy by virtue of "domestic relationship". I don't even have any rights to stop you from spending days & weeks with him, even if you plan that trip by selling all the items from our house and taking away my whole month's salary!

Applicant: This is going nowhere! I think you don't love me anymore !! I don't know what to do !! It's better if we don't talk at all for few days.
Respondnet: I do love you but the law has not provided me with relevant guidelines and suitable acts on the quality & quantity of love I am legally bound to give you. I don't mind keeping quiet as per your instructions but one of the judgements by Hon'ble Supreme Court says that "spouse's silence may amount to cruelty". I am helpless in the hands of law.

Applicant: To hell with your law !! For God's sake... can't you be your normal self with me !??
Respondnet: I am normal, but if I do not suppress my normalcy under the requirements of DV Act you might send me to jail !! I'm just trying to be a good citizen of India and serve you & the womankind. You can have me either as your normal husband or as a dog controlled by women biased laws. Tell me which one do you want?

Applicant: I want my original and normal husband.
Respondnet: Then wait till at least the DV Act and 498A are scrapped. Until then every happily married husband will abide by the requirements of DV Act to ensure they do not bypass the law; and every victimised husband will continue fighting against such gender biased, senseless and family-breaking laws.



Rgds.
P.S. This illustration is not my copyright and I apologise to that original Author to copy / paste his blog here without his permission, he may sue me if he so prefers.
 

Aishwarya,

We all can understand your suffering and have sympathy for your cause and of many more like u.

Regarding  u mentioned about “Cheer Haran of Draupadi” when Draupadi was stripped in presence of all courtier.

Let me explain u that “Draupadi” was sister (not own) of “Lord Krishna”, and “Lord Krishna” ensured death to everyone by picking one by one, who had seen the scene as a mute spectator. No one left, everyone got typical punishment in the war of “MAHABHARTA”

Regarding u mentioned about Goddess “Sita”. Let me explain u the importance of Goddess “Sita”.  Please, just go through the line of famous ‘Bhajan’ of Mahatma Gandhi “Raghupati Raghav Raja Ram, Patit Pawan Sitaram”.

The meaning of it, is God Ram can be ‘a Raghupati(head of Raghuvanshi)’, ‘a Raghav’, ‘a Raja(King)’, (that Lord Rama can be addressed by three adjectives) but it is not alone  God “Ram’,  rather it is a “Sitaram”  which is  “patit pawan” (a liberator, who washes the bad deeds/sins). Even God Ram cannot be imagined and is incomplete without Goddess “Sita”. (River Ganga is “patit pawani”)

Regarding  “Agni Pariksha”, of  Goddess “Sita”, It has many explanation where  Goddess “Sita” glows radiantly from the centre of the pyre. Immediately Rama runs to Sita and embraces her. He had never doubted her purity for a second, but, as he explains to a dazzled Sita, the people of the world would not have accepted or honoured her as a queen or a woman if she had not passed this Agni pariksha before the eyes of millions, where Agni would destroy the impure and sinful, but not touch the pure and innocent. Here also “Sita” came out as triumph.

Regarding God “Ram” abandoned Goddess “Sita”, u will have to go thro’ the “Luv Kush Kand”, where both sons of Goddess “Sita” “Luv and Kush” stopped the “Holy Horse of Aswamegh Yagya” performed by Lord Ram, and settled all the scores with not only God “Ram” but with all his company like “Lakshman” “Hanuman” “Bharat” and “Shatrughan” etc on behalf of her mother. Lord Rama was brought down to his knees. Lord Rama was in a very sorry state. Also after abandoning her, Lord Rama never forgotten Sita.

One more thing, at war with “Ravana”. God “Lakshman” got seriously injured with the arrow of “Meghnath alias Indrajit” who was “Ajey (Invincible)”.  The war was going on between Lakhshman and Meghnath. Ultimately Lakshman killed  the “Meghnath”. But behind the scene it was the “Tapasya” of Goddess “Urmila” wife of God “Lakshman” which not only saved him from “Meghnath alias Indrajit” but also made him successful. Sulochana was wife of “Meghnath” who too was equally devoted and religious, but some where she had committed a mistake, so the “Tapasya and devotion” of Goddess Urmila outweighed the “Tapasya and devotion” of Goddess Sulochana.

It is the wishes and fate of women which saves a man from trouble, but some men think otherwise. There is a quote for every woman.

All young women begin by believing they can change and reform the men they marry. They can't. George Bernard Shaw:

In ancient India women had more liberty than of today. So, not only legislative law but our religious scripttures too are in favour women, but reality is different.

These/above are religious things.

Just go thro’ the Interview of Justice Bilal Nazki to Times of India.

“Times of India 26-11-09Mumbai:

Clad in a blue T-shirt and jeans, away from the stuffy environs of the higher judiciary, former Bombay high court justice Bilal Nazki is hard to recognize. The man, seen as stern by some and sensitive by others, decided over 60,000 cases in 15 years on the bench.
Looking back on 36 years of service to the legal profession, Nazki, who is from Srinagar and was a judge of the Bombay high court from January 2008 till November 12 this year, said there are two kinds of judgments. "One may be great for legal and academic purposes," he said. "There is another which may not lay down any theory but will wipe the tears of an aggrieved person."
Nazki said he "purposely" concentrated on the latter. "When a litigant comes to court, he is not interested in how scholarly a judge is," he said. "He just wants relief. Two industrialist brothers fighting with each other can wait. But parents whose child has been killed or lost cannot." Drawing a quaint parallel, he said, "The honesty of a judge is like the virginity of a traditional Indian unmarried girl. If it is questioned, the doubt can never be laid to rest." When a litigant loses a case, he said, he should feel that the judge decided against him because he did not understand his side, not because he was dishonest. Nazki pointed out that no law requires judges to declare their assets, "but they are doing it voluntarily".
Remembrance is reward
The fear of criticism never crossed the mind of the man who braved bullets and fought terrorists in his home state, yet had a dramatic escape. Tied to a chair, he kicked one of his assailants, broke free, jumped from the first floor and hid in a paddy field after being shot five times and drenched in blood. "Kashmir in those days [1991] was like that," Nazki, who ran 5km to reach a hospital, said. "Even if people saw you running with blood all over you, nobody helped because they would meet with the same fate."
"I don't know who those people were and why they were after my life," he said. "My father told me that you can do two things: go after them and seek revenge or forget about it, live your life, and seek reward from god." Nazki promised his father he would never chase his assailants. "I did get my reward. Kashmir, for the rest of the country, is a small place, a village. To come from Kashmir and be recognized and remembered in a city like Mumbai is a reward."

The Moral is

“JO DOOSRE KA SAR KATE WO APANA SAR KATAYE, KAHE KABIR DHARAM DAS KI BADLA KABHI NA JAYE”

In Family Forum few handful of people are trying to depict or putting wrong picture of women, based on their personal one sided experience which they only know. But reality is otherwise, had the situation been like that or so horrible marriages would have come to halt. Lakhs of marriages are being consummated and all the activity of society is going on as usual. Hardly it is affecting anyone. Rather it is showing there orientation or nature.

There is one nice saying that “Honest always stand alone, they never form groups, and on the other hand unscrupulous elements forms group easily or rather mostly remain in groups.”

Some self centered, selfish, jealousy and egoistic, cannot see advancement or growth and Independence of others. They like the things to go their way as per their will and whims and used to be more concerned about their requirements. If not fulfilled then they spread hatred.  Following quote explains everything about them.

“Lawless are they that makes their wills their law.”  William Shakespeare

Changes in the society are taking place, sooner or later it is bound to happen. It is good to see that women are becoming vigilant about their rights, and raising their voices against the atrocities. Some of them have achieved remarkable success and have made their presence felt in spite of difficulty faced or against all odds in all the fields like business, space, banking, bravery, sports, politics, police and administration etc.  Everyone should be proud of them.

Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.  John F. Kennedy

“Most people who meet my wife quickly conclude that she is remarkable. They are right about this. She is smart, funny and thoroughly charming. Often, after hearing her speak at some function or working with her on a project, people will approach me and say something to the effect of, you know, I think the world of you, Barack, but your wife, wow!”  Barack Obama:

Indra Nooyi seeks women's quota at Davos

Fri, Jan 29 10:12 AM

Davos, Jan 29 (IANS) Indra Nooyi, the first Indian-born chief executive at PepsiCo, wants a quota system to get more women at the annual World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Nooyi ranked No. 3 on Forbes' 100 Most Powerful Women list last year laments that at this 'one-of-a-kind initiative,' women are still grossly underrepresented.

'We are up to 15 percent now, but I think the numbers should be more like 40 percent-50 percent,' she told ForbesWoman at Davos noting that one of the problems is that women have not 'done enough' to bring other women into Davos.

While she acknowledged that definitive conclusions were rarely, if ever, reached at the Swiss resort, it is a time for great leaders, executives and thinkers to talk about issues in a 'fairly open way.'

The 54-year-old business leader believes that bringing together a critical mass of women at Davos would ensure that women's issues were more prominent on the agenda.

Putting women on panels and having a quota system where every panel has at least one woman would 'change the whole nature of Davos,' she asserts. And just getting women to Davos at least once to 'show them how powerful Davos could be,' is the first step on a long road to success, she maintains.

Women's issues aside, Nooyi's outlook on 2010 is cautiously optimistic. While the Western economies-the US and Western Europe-are still struggling, the Middle East is experiencing tremendous buoyancy, she says.

Citing employment and job creation as the 'engine of growth,' Nooyi warns that North America, Mexico and Western Europe have to ramp up their efforts on these fronts, this year.

'At this point, we have to put our faith in all of the leaders and hope that all of the policy actions they're taking actually lead to something,' she concludes.

Indo Asian News Service

I COMPLETELY DISAGREE WITH YOU IN THIS MATTER.