Extra marital affair and property

there is no point of talking with him.He does not care for three children. Now its time for u to take some action.Only d.v act can give you a remedy. Next time he pressurize you to sale it go for filing the case...also ask maintenance for kids..he can not sale it as it is a joint property.Collect proofs of his affair first.

@ MK,

Yes, your situation is bad considering bringing up three children in such inflated economy that country is illuminated.

Best, to file divorce on desertion ground and seek maintenance. But DV, 498a are mostly theatrics. Since  you have three children court will consider your request reasonable.( And there you can press it). 

But if she files divorce she won't get the house.Where will she stay?This is not possible for a woman with three children staying in rented house always and buying a flat is not possible.

As the house already registered in her name, she would get half share. Instead of alimony, she can request the remaining half share. Else for three children he had to pay maintenance. Failing that she can attach property post warrant. So options are there, but with DV, if she fails to proove, wont it be dangerous as he can gain ground to claim divorce based on it.. Failure of DV and his statement that she is suspicious in nature and causing mental disturbance is good enough.

Please remeber even if he has paid EMI of loan, as a housewife she has share in that EMI. Thats the basis for all maintenance claim. 

Good family laywer can ensure a better method without DV and 498a.

@mk

Refer to the part of your post - "even though he may claim that he has paid for the flat and he has paid for the loan also,i still have to fight because i have 3 children to look after .i just understand that."  I require to clarify about property rights of estranged couple in respect of the house they are living in.  You clarified that you have 50% of the title rights.  That prima facie shows your absolute right on 50%.  You need not show how you pooled the amount to acquire 50% of the property.  Assuming that you did not incur even a single paisa out of the 50% of the cost of the property, even then you are entitled to the 50% of the property on two grounds - If he has incurred all the expenses but gave 50% title to you, and that too in the proximate period of marriage, this gift becomes "stri-dhan" and you will be entitled for the same without showing your investment of in the property.  Stridhan is and can be given by the husband as well as by in-laws contrary to the popular belief that it is given only from the bride's side. If it is assumed that the property was not acquired at the time of marriage and it is not stridhan, but after after a long time after the marriage it was acquired, then also you are entitled to 50% of the property.  If husband acquires certain property during the matrimonial life having 100% clear title (that is not the case here) and a working/non-working (house-making) wife's contribution is nil, then also she is entitled to 50% rights on the property by necessary implication.  A housemaking wife has been contributing to run the house without claiming any monetary compensation (wage/salary) so that indirectly helping the husband to save the amount to purchase such property.  Hence, her contribution in kind by running the house will be  taken into consideration while deciding the ownership of the property between the estranged couples.  If she is a working woman, she has been incurring the expenses of household so that allowing the husband to save the money and acquire property.  So, her indirect contribution in such property cannot be denied.  In a nutshell, what I want to submit is that the courts while deciding the property rights of a property between the estranged couple, they  will not go in conservative process of which spouse has contributed how much in the property.  Indirect contribution of the wife while she is house-making or working in other occupations will be duly taken into consideration.  The same logic also applies in your case in respect of repayment of loan on mortgaged property.  Eventhough, your husband paid the whole loan, the courts will not disregard to evaluate the efforts put by you in running the house and your role as a housemaker.  In your case, as I said earlier, the issue is further simplified that you have got 50% of title rights and you are simply asking the stayal of selling of the property, the courts will not hesitate to grant your prayer.

Obvious it is, that a husband who has 6 years long extramarital relationship cannot be an ideal husband and it is innane to think that there is no marital discord between the spouses.  Only a woman who is denigrated for such a long period knows, how humiliating her life is reduced to.  None else, especially the husbands who are fighting against their wives in the court, can palpitate the agony you are going through.  But the important question that raises is that is he entitled to peaceful MCD or divorce from your side on the ground that the marriage is dead?  Giving divorce to him is just playing in his hands.  Giving premium to his promiscuity. Accolading for his profidity.  If divorce shall be given for erring spouse, who develops extra-marital relationships, all the men who are in the need of divorce start to develop extramarital relationship to get advantage of their own mistakes.  So, you need not give him divorce and let him get divorce on any available grounds under marriage laws, as there are none.      

Originally posted by : Adv. Chandu 09868332610
	But the important question that raises is that is he entitled to peaceful MCD or divorce from your side on the ground that the marriage is dead?  Giving divorce to him is just playing in his hands.  Giving premium to his promiscuity. Accolading for his profidity.  If divorce shall be given for erring spouse, who develops extra-marital relationships, all the men who are in the need of divorce start to develop extramarital relationship to get advantage of their own mistakes.  So, you need not give him divorce and let him get divorce on any available grounds under marriage laws, as there are none.

I agree.people should not be rewarded for their mistake!

The first part regarding your right on matrimonial home is well explained by learned advocate Chandu. The views expressed by me is also same. But not giving divorce or not filing divorce is not good option. Why you need to be legally tied.. This way you encourage him of not sharing his responsibility towards children. Rather without DV, press some measure for maintaining life. One such is divorce through desertion  and cruelty of not cohabitating and claim alimony. He needs to answer for desertion as you stay in original matrimonial residence and he is not living. failure to a valid reason to court gathers divorce and due maintenance to your kids by  father.

Divorcee is neither dirty word, nor to be feel ashamed of. If so why we have all family laws defined for divorce

Please consult good family lawyer and seek his guidance.

hi once again,

the things have worsened and also the matters had reachd divorce as my husband stated tht this relation cnt work and was talking of divorce ..but then again he changed his mind and his behaviour is very revengeful..i would like to know tht can he take another loan from any one once the bank releases the papers ..though i have notified the bank to inform me once the loan installment is paid and  not to release the papers without my consent since im the joint owner,but im afraid as to the intentions of my husband where the property is concerned.can he take another loan once the bank releases the papers ?