The Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill, 2010

Mr. kumar i was expecting something else from this bill but seems like this bill is nothing but one more weapon to be given to today's woman to extort money. as per this bill women will  be free to get divorce whereas husband's will be blackmailed more and won't have freedom of divorce.

as far as my remarks on someone i can't control myself to post reply to that lady as i know she know how to cook great stories and not only on this site but also on some other sites.

Ok, now any inputs on Delhi HC Judgements especially why Mr Justice  Ghambir put at the end few clauses for Govt. to consider ?

@tortured_aatma   Arup had the same confusion as you about my profession which i have clarified in this thread itself.  Please read through the threads carefully before throwing mud.  The confusion is at your end and not mine.  What stories have i cooked up that you have verified? The same mud Arun had thrown at Renuka with all links to her previous threads.  When she showed that he was wrong in reading through the thread, atleast he had the decency to say sorry and retreat.  As i have said in my 'other' sites, men who could not get their marriage working have a common trait-- they are not able to face the truth about themselves and resort to maligning the character of the wife or say that she is cooking up stories or the likes. 

@Arun which judgement are you talking about?

Thanks Mr. Arun for this excellent posting.

According to my understanding: Impoverishment and Adequate are relative terms, aren't they?  Poor relative to whom? And adequate covers it all, adequate to maintain which standards? Adequate in Proportion to what? I think this judgement and its conclusions are a lesson to both women and men, and it would be a great resource to all of us. This perhaps is showing us the way how this act would be interpreted in future. It's also a great lesson for them who have already started clubbing grounds of Cruelty with that of IBM, perhaps to make their petition more  intimidating( Oh! we have already won, you see) thinking IBM would be a sure shot even though the amendment has not yet taken place!

@ TA : Please do not use foul language and accusations( in this case @ Sivani) to the members here and maintain basic dignity in a forum like this.

RG

@ Renuka,

Yes, I agree 50 : 50 to your say bze both sides of coin are bound to interpret as they may please based on who wants it in which way with what package and strings attached. Let us wait for more interpretation from other ld. memebers.


@ Shivani,

The entire Judgment of Mr Justice K. Ghambir is posted in page 6 of this thread you may throw your basic law interpretation confined to this Judgment as you may please minus mixure of other issues please.


@ General

BTW I am missing Unbiased Advise, Advocate pot shot on the entire discussion of this thread, any clue on his divine silence ! :-)

MR T_A,

this bill is nothing but one more weapon to be given to today's woman to extort money

 - YES YOU ARE RIGHT, AMPLE SCOPE IS THERE.

as per this bill women will  be free to get divorce

whereas husband's will be blackmailed more and won't have freedom of divorce.

- YES YOU ARE RIGHT

13. Divorce-  marriage be dissolved by a decree of divorce on that the other party-

(i) had voluntary s*xual intercourse with any other person; or

(ia)  treated the petitioner with cruelty; or

(ib) has deserted the spouse 

(ii) has ceased to be a Hindu 

(iii)of unsound mind,  include schizophrenia; "psychopathic disorder";

 leprosy; or veneral disease  or

(vi) has renounced the world 

(vii) has not been heard of as being alive

Or one year non cohabtiation after Judicial seperation or RCR

With all the above provisions to get a divorce and save women from abusive reletionship,

Our judges in the neme of evidence prolong the matter atleast for four to five years.

Then on appeal by either party The HCs take atleast another three to five years.

Then SC can take its own sweet time and in the end the women getting a divorce is a simple mirage. Most women who marry at the age of 30 would reach menopause stage. But she would have the satisfaction of stopping her husband from getting officially married. The husband would have happy that he did not pay money to wife. Children happily grow up mostly by the side of the mother sympathising with her. 

So our advocates and Judges are happy that they earned their fees. 

One thing is very clear more the legal grounds more the reasons for not granting Divorce.

The unwritten Law "Pay Money else......" adjournment is the awoved policy of the Judiciary from top to bottom. (Mr Kholi was asked to pay Rs 25 Lakhs after beingfound by SC that Ms. Neelam Kholi caused as much damage as she can!)

When Order 8 Rule 10 regarding filing written statement within 90 days was sought to be implemented in the right spirit, Our SC (Passayth J) went on a research spree and wrote thesis on "How the Courts power to grant endless adjournment can not taken away" and effectively paved way for prolonging every litigation!( The judgement would rreveal the insatiable desire if courts to adjourn cases and there by render gross Injustice!)

So what is going to be a great change for women if 13C and 13D are added to the above grounds for Divorce?

Scenario 1  : Wife wants divorce. Do not want any money. 

Husband can make her pay Money if he is going to say and lead evidence for against 3 years seperation! A good advocate can drag the case by filing IAs calling for documents etc and a good five years as usual in lower court. Now appeals can take care of husbands cause.

Scenario 2 : Wife claims financial hardship . Wife want Money and Divorce

More IAs about income proofs and quantum. Rest repeat above.

It is good law for husbands. He need not bother as nothing is changed to him. He is already in the Gutter. His only hope and friend is the Court which would drag the matter endlessly. He can be satisfied his wife is roaming around the corridors of Justice.

So take it easy ! Our courts are very reliable and they will never render Justice.

In India we can not Change any Law for good. We are experts in diluting laws and there lies  our success .

This law is adding few more sections for Judges to play around! So relax.

Quote Katju "We can pass orders, We cannot execute; We ca not Police" and go to sleep guys

yes mr suresh,

you studied the matter and study it rightly.

"This law is adding few more sections for Judges to play around!"

exactly.

@ Suresh garu,

Excellent interpretation in short and sweet way, it sums up the discussion on probability of having only two scenarios available to either spouse.  Jai hon mera bharat mahan :-)

So shall we now ask Unbiased_Advise, Advocate the initiator of this thread post to close it as resolved OR aam janta have some more to say ????????

some more.

analysis of the bill just started.

most of the previous discussions were personal. people were keen to know, whether their individual interest were protected by the law or not.

but untill it is analysed, it can not be said with confirmation.

mainly four types of interest group is there.

1) those who want divorce by using the ground - IB.

2) the so called 'faminist' group - who are more interested for their privy purse.

3) the advocate's group - whose interest mainly on the continue the the 'spouses battle'.

4) the judges - delhi high court already comments on the matter - which is yet to study. ( thanks for your posting)

' post to close it as resolved '  - as a general practice, a thread started by any one, but latter it becomes a public property, full with knowledge and discussions. it continuing and appears when other members search. it can not be closed, other than admin.

it is a good and importent practice.

thanks.

Let me be candid about this thread! I had posted this Thread just to share the PDF File which is rare commodity for general people immediately after it was Tabled in the higher House of the Parliament, I would like to thank all those who participated and brought this thread to this Level.

I Conclude by saying the "All eeeis Well" a quote from the movie "Three idiots" 

Here In this IBD Bill "All eeeis well" for "Legislature, Lawyers, Females & Feminist groups" and as usual men are always the "Idiots" 

The only Law in India  that was revoked was POTA supposedly after debate and public pressure.

The truth is POTA was misused against VAIKO by Jaya. Then politicians started misusing against their rivals.

The good thing was the law was Diluted and finally scrapped.

So if we all agree that if 13 B is simple mutual consent ie both parties just want to get out of marriage , then courts are Divorce registrars. But the courts tire out both parties to file 13 B. Instead the courts can the moment one party files for divorce 'Grant it Forthwith" and if it is divorce petiton all other relief can be worked without withholding relief sought for.

Bur our Lawyers and Judges made it so difficult for Both spouses and also a prized and prcious order. ie if you get a Mutual Consent Order there can not any appeal!!

Nobody denies that laws are misused in India. Not only 498a.DV etc., even IPC 302 is also misused. Take M K Alagiri case. he went jail on charge of murder and aquitted later. 

So my take is instead od debating the pros and cons of any new Law, we can discuss how these laws are misused and find ways how to Counter Misuse.

In fact Counter Misuse of Matrimonial Laws alone can bring Justice to spouses if not speedily 

as usual men are always the "Idiots" -  thanks for the comments, from a fellow idot.

but not all are idots, a section of men try to solve their problem immediately, by burning their wives. they are so desparate. so cleaver, try to wash out the evidences. this is also a bare fact - which we can not ignore.

The pota revoked as the politians were victimised.

but in matrimonial field, polititians not much involved. that's why they do not care the public feelings.

"  if we all agree that if 13 B is simple mutual consent ie both parties just want to get out of marriage , then courts are Divorce registrars."

my opinion also same, but the common people has no such power. power rested on the mps. they can do it.but now the question is why they will do it what is there interest?

the moment one party files for divorce 'Grant it Forthwith" and if it is divorce petiton all other relief can be worked without withholding relief sought for.

 - I JUST WANT THIS. BUT WHO CARES WHOM?

ADVOCATES GROUP OPPOSE IT FOR THEIR PROFESSIONAL INTEREST.

JUDGES WILL ALSO UNHAPPY FOR THEIR LESS POWER OF POKING FACTORS / ISSUES.

INTEREST GROUP OF MAINTENANCE CLAIMER, NOT LIKED IT, AS THEIR ANOTHER INTENTION IS TO TORTURE THE PARTY TAKING HELP OF ILL INTENTION ACTS.