live in relationship with female servant !!!!

i think few months back,a judgement was posted in LCI wherein the judge said that live in relation means "Walk in and walk out" at will.there's no binding for a man to maintain the partner,unless the relationship has been for  many yrs.,where the couple showed themselves as husband and wife to the society also.

there are people who have a relationship for 5 yrs also.so how can we say that they re husband and wife?

in the above case,did this man mention his name in any forms ,say,for example,the maid's kids' school forms?

or did he mention the maid's name as his wife wherever he may have to fill any form?

3 yrs living together is not enuf time to say that they are like  a wedded couple.this seems like a big joke..

the widower man seems to have got no support,while the lady attracted many foolish sympathisers with the power of her tears...so she won.

i hv a pretty similar kindda moot court problm....whts d citation of dis case?? read d MOOT COURT problm in d forum

Did you know Why shiney ahuja rape with minor servant ?

Rightly said By  

In the non-urban areas Women have been oppressed by men whereas in the Urban areas Men have been Oppressed by Women.

Gradually this message is spreading in non-urban areas and there also Men are becoming victim of being mobile ATM.

similar case like mr n d tiwary.

eh MkW- jktdqekj iksG]

;k ckcr eyk vls okVrs dh] yXu o v”kk izdkjs yXu djrk ,d= jkg.ks ¼live-in relationship½ ;k osxosxG;k ckch vkgsr- Hkkjrkrhy ,danjhr lkekthd ifjfLFkrh ikgrk yXukf”kok; ,d= jkg.;kpk fu.kZ; ?ks.;kiqohZ L=h o iq#’kkus vkilke/;s gs Li’V dj.ks xjtsps vkgs rs yXukizek.ks tckcnkÚ;k ?ks.;kl r;kj vkgsr dk\ fdaok rs ,desdkaph xjt Eg.kwu ,d= jkgr vkgsr- R;kp izek.ks foHkDr gks.;kph osG vkY;kl L=h T;kizek.ks esUVuUl~ vtZ nk[ky djrs R;kpizek.ks iq#’k esUVuUl~ vtZ nk[ky d# “kdsy dk\

T;kosGh loZ xks’Vh letwu metwu ,[kknh L=h frP;k xjtslkBh ,[kkn;k iq#’kkcjkscj yXukf”kok; LoPNsus iRuh lkj[kh jkgr vlsy ¼iRuh uOgs½ o uarj R;kaps iVsuk Eg.kwu rs osxGs >kY;kl rs dsoG irh iRuh lkj[ks ¼irh iRuh uOgs½ ,d= jkgr gksrs Eg.kwu R;k iq#’kkoj esUVuUl~ph tckcnkjh Vkd.ks ;ksX; gks.kkj ukgh-

Which language it is in???

This is a pure case of exploitation and Courts by allowing maintainence are PROVOKING THIS SIN!

Good to see females opposing such exploitation.Otherwise most feminists will show loads of sympathy to women outside marriage.

Yes.Women becoming enemies of women due to this laws.They dont get punished even aftr spoiling another women's lives.

hi gaury,

in the above case,there was no wife involved as the man is a widower.so no home was broken.

still i found this news full of immoral  behaviors and exploitation.

even if we assume that this man loved his maid,what stopped them from marrying each other?

this maid also had kids.what example did she set before her kids?that you live with a widower old enuf to be your dad,and after some dispute arises,drag him to court to get money!

because of such cases,cases of genuine wives are kept on waiting lists in courts.to solve such problems,IRBM is suggested!

but no one thinks of abolishing maintenance practice to women outside the relationship of marriage,that also lead to backlog of cases.if such stupid laws are removed,then the backlog can be cleared.making divorces quick and easy will only lower the postion of spouses in the eyes of each other.

But who cares!

our lawmakers are taking all such steps to finish the sanctity of marriage & encourage promiscuous behaviors & awarding maintenance to such people.

MAINTENANCE SHOULD E BE GIVEN ONLY IF THEY STILL ARE IN THE SAME RELATIONSHIP.

COURTS ARE NOT WORKING PROPERLY.

I HAVE NEVER SEEN ANY ORDER WHERE IT IS DIRECTED TO ANY WIFE TO DO ALL THE WORK OF HER HUSBAND ...... IN FOCUT. SO MAN SHOULD ALSO BE NOT DIRECTED TO GIVE MAINTENANCE IN FOCUT....