rajesh (rtrtrt) 12 August 2017
| Originally posted by : rajesh | ||
 |
Order 7 Rule 1 and 2 of code civil procedure.... All that I know is sir... My apologies... For not being that informative.... I will have to check with my Advocate |  |
Mr. Rajesh,
Order 7 Rule 1 and 2 of code civil procedure....contains procedure for seeking relief, but specific section under which relief is sought has to be mentioned in the application, which you would have mentioned, if you have really filed any such application. I am asking only about that section under which you feel that your marriage was null & void, being a case of "Hindu n non Hindu married under Hindu marriage ac,." as per your earlier statement.
Adv Radhika Mehta (Advocate) 16 August 2017
Mr Dingra, they are litigants who are not expected to know the Section. They have limited knowledge of law and that is why they message on such forums. If you are unaware of the Section, do not reply to that particular query.
The relevant Section is Section 5, which clearly stipulates that it is a marriage solemnized between two Hindus. You can also read Section 2 of the Hindu Marriage Act which stipulates to whom this Act applies.
| Originally posted by : Adv Radhika Mehta | ||
|
Mr Dingra, they are litigants who are not expected to know the Section. They have limited knowledge of law and that is why they message on such forums. If you are unaware of the Section, do not reply to that particular query. The relevant Section is Section 5, which clearly stipulates that it is a marriage solemnized between two Hindus. You can also read Section 2 of the Hindu Marriage Act which stipulates to whom this Act applies. |
|
Ms. Radhika Mehta,
I wonder, to know, whether I or the querist, himself, asked you to reply my question? If you have replied on the asking or on behalf of the querist, Mr. Jigrasu asked another question,"Have not you asked your lawyer under which specific section of which Act he considered the marriage as invalid? Was there any specific reason for not touching that point for reply, when you preferred to reply on behalf of the querist?
Secondly, on what ground you are sure that they are litigants and not the querist a law student having desired to seek ready made answer to his law school's exercise?
Thirdly, does section 5 of HMA states anywhere that if anyone of both is not Hindu and get married, their marriage can definitely be treated as null & void?
Fourthly, when the querist has already filed a case to get his marriage treated as null & void, he must have filed his case through a lawyer to get his case fought. So, do you mean to say that his lawyer was also ignorant of law, if he filed a case on his behalf?
Fifthly, being a Director of some company or so, are you really practising law and since when in which which court of Mumbai?
Sixthly, when the querist feels that his marriage is null & void he must have been informed by his own lawyer, why his marriage can be treated as null & void. So, even if you treat me not knowing about the said section 5, what harm did you find, if I asked him to clarify his own position on which specific ground he treated his marriage as null & void.
The irony is that you have referred section 5 of the Hindu Maariages Act, probably to show that you are much more knowledgeable than me and the lawyer of the querist also. BUT PERHAPS YOU FORGOT THAT YOUR PREVIOUS ANSWER TO THE QUESSTION WAS THAT "Firstly the provisions of the Hindu Marriage are not applicable to you as the Hindu Marriage Act only applies to Hindu. Unless and until your wife had converted at the time of marriage, you cannot file under HMA. There are grounds on which a null and void Petition can be filed. If you have filed on the ground of fraud or misrepresentation then there is a limitation of one year from the date of discovery of the fraud. .............. . You need to elaborate more on the facts of the case."
If, as per your own statement, the Hindu Marriages Act does not apply to the querist's problem, what was the relevance of quoting section 5 of the said Act on your own part?
Still further, if you wanted the querist to elaborate more on the facts of the case, what was your specific objection, if I have asked some fact to be elaborated by the querist?
By the way, don't you feel that your intervention was quite uncalled for? However, if you know why his marriage can be treated as null & void under HMA, instead of the querist, you are welcome to quote specific section of the Act, which may specifically state that his marriage can be treated as null and void because both of the couple belonged to some other sect or religion. I can say with certainty that Section 5 does not spell any such thing that only one spouse being Hindu his marriage can be treated as null & void. The Act applies when both of the couple are Hindus.
Also, please note, if you want to address any specific person by name, must observe the protocol to spell his name correctly, as you wrongly spelled my name as "Dingra" instread of "DHingra".
Adv Radhika Mehta (Advocate) 16 August 2017
| Originally posted by : PS Dhingra, 1962dcg@gmail.com | ||
|
This is a public forum. Not a private communication between yourself and the querist. Either ways, they are here in this forum to seek help so isnt that immaterial? the forum dosent specify that law students cannot ask questions. Sec 5, whilst laying down the conditions for a valid Hindu Marriage, specifies that a marriage may be solemnized between two Hindus if the following conditions are fulfilled. I have specified hereinabove also that the correct remed was to file a Petition under the Specific Relief Act. I dont understand how the same is relevant to this particular query? Im not appearing before you for an interview that you have right to question me about the same. However, for the purpose of getting the record straight, im a lawyer practising in matrimonial law. I dont understand why you are taking it so personally. How can you assume that his lawyer must have explained everything to him? i dont know about you but i find a lot of Advocates not explaining complete facts to their client as a result of which clients are compelled to approach forums like these to get answers.
The Hindu marriage Act will not apply as it applies to only marriges solemnized bwtween two Hindus. But to explain that to your learned self, i had to point out the provisions of Sec 5. The litigant comes to this forum to get answers, not to get grilled further by lawyers. They are not students and we are not teachers who have to take their test. No I dont feel my intervention was uncalled for. Please read SEc 5 and more particularly the portion which says that a marriage may be solemnized between two Hindus. Apologies for the same, Mr. Dhingra. |
|
Discussions have become quite interesting. Although I am a JIGYASU, i.e., a learner, but I found Ms. Radhika's replies totally evasive on the very valid points of Mr. Dhingra. When only one of the couple belonged to the Hindus religion and also she herself committed that the HMA did not apply in their case, how she is insisting on application of section 5 of the HMA for the other non-Hindu couple, is really surprising!
| Originally posted by : JIGYASU | ||
|
Discussions have become quite interesting. Although I am a JIGYASU, i.e., a learner, but I found Ms. Radhika's replies totally evasive on the very valid points of Mr. Dhingra. When only one of the couple belonged to the Hindus religion and also she herself committed that the HMA did not apply in their case, how she is insisting on application of section 5 of the HMA for the other non-Hindu couple, is really surprising! Further, when she believed that they are litigants who are not expected to know the Section, she could have given a proper thought, how the querist could come across "Order 7 Rule 1 and 2 of code civil procedure" with reference to which he put the question. The order of the CPC could be known either to a lawyer or a law student? So, I am of the firm opinion that her replies to the points of Mr. Dhingra, are quite irrelevant. The point to ponder is, if she prefers to apply the HMA on the Hindu spouse, how she can apply the same on the other one, who is a non-Hindu spouse? Apparently the question was of academic nature to test the knowledge of students, not the experts, who can be supposed to help only the persons facing problems, not by providing solution to the exercises of the students. However, if she prefers to take up charity tution for the law students, even then she may have to make a review of her own knowledge of the marriage laws prevalent in India for the satisfaction of students and experts both. |
|
JIGYASU ji,
Thanks for appreciating my points. In fact, some over-enthusiastic persons with their partial knowledge feel pride in finding faults in the other persons without even applying their commonsense, what to say of going through the actual facts. So does the example seem to fit in the case of Ms. Radhika Mehta also, who wanted to apply HMA to a non-Hindu also, probably without being capable to differentiate between a real problem and a hypothetical academic query.
Apparently, due to her partial knowledge, she assumed as if the HMA can also be applied in the case where the other spouse is a non-Hindu, whereas the very first sentence of section 5 clearly specifies that "A marriage may be solemnized between any TWO HINDUS" if the conditions thereuinder are fulfilled, whereas one of the spouse was not a Hindu.
Anyway, I appreciate your concern and presence of mind in appropriate analysis of the issues, despite being still a learner. I feel you have far better knowledge than the said Advocate, who vainly ventured to justify her stand without understanding the basic facts.
Adv Radhika Mehta (Advocate) 17 August 2017
Thank you so much Mr Jigyasu and Mr Dhingra for your valuable insights on my knowledge. For people who are unable to read, this is the only response which i can manage. Before your great esteemed learned selves decided to partake in this discussion, i had mentioned that Hindu Marriage Act DOES NOT APPLY AND THEY SHOULD HAVE FILED UNDER THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT. However, because of ignorant people like you who prefer to question litigants to increase your knowledge and who prefer to judge people on their decision to end their marriage, i had to refer to sec 5 to point out that Hindu Marriage Act applies only when a marriage is solemnized between two hindus. Beyond this, i am not interested in having any more discussions with people who have such enormous egos that they cannot indulge in any healthy discussions.
| Originally posted by : Adv Radhika Mehta | ||
|
Not a question of either way. Unless you could know the reason of asking question from the querist by me, or you were not able to distinguish between the real problem or a law school student's academic question, your presumption about my knowledge was quite unfounded. You could have exercised some patience to know for what purpose I asked the question. Could not you feel that your advice to the querist to file petition under specific Relief Act after 5 years in addition to his originally existing petition was made only by reading the question between the lines without understanding even the basics of the question, when the querist had already stated "Filed a null and void petition in the family court in the year 2012," He also made a specific reference to the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, when he stated marriage to have been "solemnised under Hindu marriage act, in the year 2006." I automatically got the right to question you, when you have questioned my response directly addressing me that too without understanding either the basics of the question or my purpose to ask such question from the author of the question. Now from your own answer that "im a lawyer practising in matrimonial law," your own profile becomes doubtful, as I am of the view that being a Director of a company or any other organization you cannot be a practitioner in law. So, either your profile, as "Director" or your own statement that you are a lawyer practising in matrimonial law can be wrong. I have not taken it personally, but for your questioning me on the basis of your uncalled for immature presumption and without knowing the purpose of asking my question, It is my way of teaching law students to make them self reliant to be thorough in law through their own study instead of depending merely on spoon feeding even through wrong feedback of experts, like yours in this case. Your stand is quite wrong, when you have not been able to understaqnd even the basics of the question, as the question was made with specific reference to the HMA, when the querist stated the marriage to have been "solemnised under Hindu marriage act, in the year 2006," AND ALSO that he had already "Filed a null and void petition in the family court in the year 2012." Even your advice to file suit under the Specific Relief Act was not called for when his original application under HMA already stood filed 5 years ago. You even did not specify whether he should withdraw his original petition or not and under which section of the Specific Relief Act he would be eligible to file suit to get his marriage treated as null & void. When you knew that the HMA applies only to the marriages solemnized betweenTWO Hindus, reference of HMA in this case was quite irrelevant and uncalled for on your part to make me learn anything from you, when you failed yourself, why my question pertained to HMA, when the querist stated the marriage between a Hindu and a NON-Hindu was solemnised under HMA. So, that clearly proved that you prefer to read only between the lines without trying to understand the central idea of the query of the author as well as the object of questioning his stance. So, do you feel yourself to be the self styled protector of the querists to ensure that they should not be grilled when they come forward with some quite hypothetical problems? If you are unable to differenciate between a hypothetical problem and a real problem that is your fault only, not mine. Also, if you believe that we are not teachers, why and with what intention you indulged in to teaching him and me also some wrong lesson merely on his hypothetical problem and what was the relevance of your earlier reply, "Either ways, they are here in this forum to seek help so isnt that immaterial? the forum dosent specify that law students cannot ask questions?" Nice plea! So, you feel your right to intervene without any inducement, but decline on my right to question you on direct goading me unduly! Thanks. Finally you realised at least one of your mistake. |
|
Ms Radhika Mehta,
Quite evasive replies! My replies are given below each of your replies above. You may like to see.
| Originally posted by : Adv Radhika Mehta | ||
|
Thank you so much Mr Jigyasu and Mr Dhingra for your valuable insights on my knowledge. For people who are unable to read, this is the only response which i can manage. Before your great esteemed learned selves decided to partake in this discussion, i had mentioned that Hindu Marriage Act DOES NOT APPLY AND THEY SHOULD HAVE FILED UNDER THE SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT. However, because of ignorant people like you who prefer to question litigants to increase your knowledge and who prefer to judge people on their decision to end their marriage, i had to refer to sec 5 to point out that Hindu Marriage Act applies only when a marriage is solemnized between two hindus. Beyond this, i am not interested in having any more discussions with people who have such enormous egos that they cannot indulge in any healthy discussions. | |
Ms. Radhika Mehta,
Good excuse for self satisfaction, but lame excuse, Ms Radhika. I knew you won't resist replying my pinch in response to Mr. Jigyasu's reply. So I deferred point-wise reply to your earlier post in wait of your reaction on my post in reply to Mr. Jigyasu. I read the question very well and also knew what I was replying and with what purpose. Contrarily, in my earlier post I have amply proved that you only tried to read only between the lines, not only the question, but also my reply just to demonstrate your immaturity, where you could not even understand the basics of the question, which was put with specific reference to HMA. Your demonstrated further immaturity when you have considered the conditions under section 5 as the section for treating the marriage asd void without going through the other part of the HMA.
Now, you being a knowledgeable practitioner of matrimonial law, I put a very straight question to you, which section of which Act prohibits the marriage between two persons of different sects, i.e., where one person is Hindu and the other a Non-Hindu and according to which section their marriage can be treated as null & void? You asnwer may also help the querist to realize his own mistake, if he has really filed his case under HMA. Won't you like to help the querist in that respect? If not I, at least the querist would be obliged to find appropriate advice and help from you.
Being a specialist in matrimonial laws, you may also like to enlighten, which section of the Specific Relief Act can apply to treat marriages as null & void when a person gets fed up from his Non-Hindu wife after enjoying 11 years of married life.
Now please don't tell me that I don't have right to question you. It is quite simple, being a lawyer, you must be knowing, if you have the right to examine me, I automatically get the right to cross-examine you.
Adv Radhika Mehta (Advocate) 18 August 2017
To two of the most bigoted men i have interacted with who are placated and satisfied by scratching each other's backs, read the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Niranjani Roshan Rao and Roshan Mark Pinto to understand my replies. And if you stil do not understand, then go and ask the Judges which SEctions.
You come and accuse me of being unable to resist to your so-called pinch but werent you waiting to pounce on me with your response? Remember, Mr Dhingra, when you point fingers at anyone, four of your fingers are pointing back at you.
All along, i have strived to keep my replies to the point and most importantly cordial but unfortunately the same cannot be said about you. You and your cronie have been downright rude and nasty towards me, calling me immature. May i ask who in the world are you to judge me? A so-called consultant and legal analytic? You may derive immense pleasure from picking on people and demeaning them, but do not henceforth try that on me. I do not appreciate the same. I am coming to this forum to help others not to get insulted by sadistic chauvanist males who have no intention to help others and are there only to judge.
Mr Dhingra, on encouragement from a person who is here only to question and judge others, you may feel that you are being very witty and intelligent but trust me even the little bit of respect which your age had generated in me towards you has diminished as you are being unnecessarily rude and insulting. And why? Simply because i asked you not to grill the querist as he may not be aware of the Sections? After that, you have just dragged the issue relentlessly.
| Originally posted by : Adv Radhika Mehta | ||
|
To two of the most bigoted men i have interacted with who are placated and satisfied by scratching each other's backs, read the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Niranjani Roshan Rao and Roshan Mark Pinto to understand my replies. And if you stil do not understand, then go and ask the Judges which SEctions. You come and accuse me of being unable to resist to your so-called pinch but werent you waiting to pounce on me with your response? Remember, Mr Dhingra, when you point fingers at anyone, four of your fingers are pointing back at you. All along, i have strived to keep my replies to the point and most importantly cordial but unfortunately the same cannot be said about you. You and your cronie have been downright rude and nasty towards me, calling me immature. May i ask who in the world are you to judge me? A so-called consultant and legal analytic? You may derive immense pleasure from picking on people and demeaning them, but do not henceforth try that on me. I do not appreciate the same. I am coming to this forum to help others not to get insulted by sadistic chauvanist males who have no intention to help others and are there only to judge. Mr Dhingra, on encouragement from a person who is here only to question and judge others, you may feel that you are being very witty and intelligent but trust me even the little bit of respect which your age had generated in me towards you has diminished as you are being unnecessarily rude and insulting. And why? Simply because i asked you not to grill the querist as he may not be aware of the Sections? After that, you have just dragged the issue relentlessly. |
|
Ms. Radhika Mehta,
On your post I remember one quote of Ghalib, "dil ko behlaane ke liye Ghalib yeh khyal achha hai."
Before expecting me to remember, it would have been better had you remembered, "when you point fingers at anyone, four of your fingers are pointing back at you," as it was you the first, who raised the finger at me. Never mind, if your forget, but ask others to remember. It was not the case simply so where you asked me not to grill the querist on the pretext that he may not be aware of the Sections, but you tried to mislead not only him, but also tried to impose your own misunderstanding about the HMA or even the Specific Relief Act. If the Specific Relief Act can be applied to get rid of his wife, why you have avoided to reply my specific question, "which section of the Specific Relief Act can apply to treat marriages as null & void when a person gets fed up from his Non-Hindu wife after enjoying 11 years of married life" to ruin the married life of his wife? More so what far are the family/ marriage laws are there. BY THE WAY, WHAT CIVIL RIGHT YOU WANTED TO ENFORCE IN FAVOUR OF THE HUSBAND BY EXPECTING DENIAL OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF HIS WIFE THROUGH THE COURT by application of the Specific Relief Act?
Adv Radhika Mehta (Advocate) 18 August 2017
I am not here to justify my opinion to people like you or to teach you law. If the querist has any questions, he can reach out to me directly.
| Originally posted by : Adv Radhika Mehta | ||
|
I am not here to justify my opinion to people like you or to teach you law. If the querist has any questions, he can reach out to me directly. | |
You forget that it is only you, who tried to teach me law, but failed to justify yourself on any angle of matrimonial law, when you claimed to be a matrimonial law practitioner.
So, it is your sacred duty to justify your opinions or accept your mistake, when you have preferred to start the discussion by yourself without any justification.
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
