Wife's right to husbands self-earned property who is alive

Law as it stood and combating a case with strategy are altogether two distinctly different measures.  I know ultimately it will be difficult to prove that wife has contribution in purchasing properties standing in the name of her husband (although may not be impossible ) yet temporarily selling properties by the husband can be stopped , and its continuity can run up to appeal. LAW which we are practising was introduced by the British people who themselves misused and abused the process of law which are evidently appearing in many decided cases

Misuse and Abuse of law is not uncommon and that does not constitute or otherwise meant as wrong guidance or opinion.. If for the benefit or protection of a wife and child it occurs that cannot be said or treated as a scanty measure followed for fructifying non-sense cause also.  iT IS TO BE REMEMBERED that in our Holy MAHABHARAT King Judhistir had to tell lie uttering 'ASSWATHAMA HATAH before his Guru DRONACHARYA  being advised by LORD KRISHNA whom we worship as God..  IF OUR GOD DIRECTS TO FOLLOW UNETHICAL MEASURE then how I can be critisized ?

Adopting knavery in a war cannot be said as bad practise.  Legal combating is also like an war..

Dear Biswanathji....

It is nice to know that :

1) You have so gracefully accepted that you would misuse and abuse the process of law if required and you are justifying the same because british did it.

2) You are also accepting that it is OK to be unethical because so and so character did it in Mahabharata.

3) You feel Legal combating is like a war and everything is fair by hook or by crook.

Mr. Biswanathji, people like you are setting a terrible example and giving a bad name to your fraternity by doling out such thoughts and ideology.  You should retire and watch some spicy Balaji teleserials to satisfy your lusts of family feuds instead of giving such illogical advice to innocent victims to break their families...

By the way, I should call you "SHAKUNI MAMA" for using the law as your dice and maybe I should quote examples of good winning over bad from hundreds of indian mythological stories......which shows that lies and falsehood will never win over truth and goodness.

The law actually is least ethically followed. Blaming a lawyer no use.....system needs correction. By the ways there are loopholes in the system enabling to take advantage the catch is who grasps first. The husband above had worked hard days n nights so its his wish to do whatever he wants of his self earned property. Thats what he's doing.....today's females have 50% reservation everywhere proving thrm efficient Start working like your husband madam from today and stop worrying.

On this particular thread some members are showing themselves as extra smart. They are too smart to make their own law suggesting here that a wife can restrain the sell of self acquired property of husband.

Sorry to intervene in their imaginary law that so far there is no law which prevents a husband to sell his own self earned property and assets.

A wife is only entitled for alimony and maintenance and she can't refrain or restrain her husband to not buy or not sale any property if that belongs to his own self earned money.

She can claim Right to residence but can't force her husband to not sale his self earned property if he needs money for any urgency.

Here husband has to provide an alternate accommodation according to his earning and status. Even court can't force husband that not to sell his property if he is ready to pay her maintenance and alimony.

Proclamation of property or assets are done only when husband is absconding and not paying her arrears of maintenance.

So,my dear above few lawyers and members what you are suggesting and what predicting the querist to do is totally irrational.

I request you to guide the victims in a practical and in current law and not in an imaginary law.

And this imaginary law i.e IRBM is still not arrived in Homes of innocent victims. So,please keep distance while suggesting some fake advices.

Thanks & Regards,

(ESIS)

In my case, my wife filed an injunction against sale or transfer of my property. This lasted for few months after which the judge modified it and ordered me to pay rent to her.

She appealed and the matter is in HC now. It's been two years since this drama started.

So, yes the law can be misused to stop husband from dealing with his self earned property (purchased even before marriage).

Thanks to all of my Learned friends who differ with me and I do appreciate their counter views based upon their ethics.

MR . DV ACT BUSTER 

                                      I AM OF THE OPINION THAT MR. DV ACT BUSTER HAD THOUGHT THAT HE IS THE SUPREME COMMANDER OF ALL THE HIGH COURTS IN INDIA INCLUDING THE HONORABLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND IS GIVING HIS OPINION . YOU COULD GIVE THIS AS A JUDGEMENT ITSELF IF YOU WERE TO BE ELEVATED AS A JUDGE OF EVEN THE LOWEST COURT IN INDIA . THIS MAY BE THE REASON WHY YOUR NAME HAD NOT FOUND A PLACE EVEN FOR APPOINTMENT AS IN MUNISIF COURT. YOU MAY SAY THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO BE ELEVATED AS A JUDGE OF ANY COURT . IF MR. BISWANATH TELLS THIS , THEN THOSE WHO KNOW HIS EXPERIENCE WILL ACCEPT THAT . THERE MUST BE A WAY OF POLITENESS IN EXPRESSING ONES VIEWS IN THIS FORUM .I HOPE EVEN MR DV BUSTER LIKE BLOCKBUSTERS WILL EVEN HAVE A REAL FIGHT IN THE COURT HALL ITSELF IF THE OPPOSITE PARTY'S ADVOCATE CONTRADICTS HIS ARGUMENTS .  ONLY IF ANYONE TAKES THE OPINION OF MY SO CALL LEARNED TO THE POWER OF 100 FRIEND'S OPINION    ( THIS IS MATHEMATICS ) WILL FALL NOT ONLY INTO A PIT BUT INTO THE DEEPEST VALLEY IN THE WORLD . EVEN NOW I AM HAVING THE JUDGEMENT OF A WOMAN FROM SOUTH INDIA WHO APPROACHED THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FOR GETTING A EQUAL SHARE IN HER HUSBAND'S PROPERTY. SHE NOT ONLY GOT THAT BUT SHE ALSO GOT MAINTENANCE EXPENSES FOR HER 2 MAJOR DAUGHTERS TILL THEY GET A JOB OR GET MARRIED . IN A DAY OR TWO I WILL QUOTE THE IMPORTANT PORTIONS OF THAT JUDGEMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT IN ADDITION TO THE DETAILS OF THE JUDGEMENT WHICH EVERYBODY CAN TAKE A PRINTOUT OF THAT JUDGEMENT INCLUDING THE LATEST ONES THAT WILL APPEAR UNDER THAT COLUMN. IN SUCH A CASE WHAT WILL MY FRIEND GIVE TO ME . I DON'T WANT MONEY . WILL HE GIVE ME A GOOD NON VEGETARIAN TREAT IN A GOOD HOTEL . I WILL NOT EAT MUCH . ALONG WITH ME THOSE WHO SUGGESTED THAT THERE ARE JUDGEMENT IN THIS MATTER MUST ALSO BE INCLUDED - JOSEPH WILFRED - 24/03/2014 AT 22.00 HRS 

In continuation of my above post  and in connection thereof I need  mention here the scriptture of RIG VEDA

"let all noble thoughts come from all sides".

Dear Joseph Wilfred,

A small suggestion to you:-

Never Write your opinions in a caps lock font as it looks annoying.

No body could give a pause when he/she is reading your post. The reason is simple your post seems like houseflies sh*ts. Please use small fonts.

second thing:

I am keen to read such judgement of Supreme court where wife had forcefully or not forcefully refrained her husband to sale his self asset property even though he was paying maintenance to her.

Please provide me such judgement. Even all LCI friends are eager to read such an extraordiniary judgement beyond law of land.

@Mr. Bishwanath Roy,

Sir, your age is higher than your experience but you behave on this LCI forum as your experience is greater than your age...

I do respect your experience but what is the use of such experience where your legal knowledge goes out of the box even not touching the simple professional ethics which is very important even you would have learnt 35 years back . You bluntly enforces your words even though it is not the settled law.

and god sure ,, plz don't say after this that in practical world law what we get through gazetted official notification doesn't follow in courts. This is because at many a times I have noticed that you forcefully want to settle your law even though in legal world it has no meaning.

I beg my pardon, I know you also know that there is no law right now which enforces any wife to restrain her husband to not enjoy his self asset property via- selling it or again buying it as it all depends solely on him. Nobody in this world can legally barred him from doing so till he is alive.

But,very sorry to say that "After my post" your reply came as the following:

Thanks to all of my Learned friends who differ with me and I do appreciate their counter views based upon their ethics.

My dear sir,

The above red sentences spoken by you only tells that you are disappointed by knowing that you have no counters against the legal law as per today.So, you went for subjecting ethics.

I ask to you ,

what ethics?

do you think those who have replied legally correct are only morale chaps and knows only ethics. If you are thinking like this then I am very sorry that your age is making you to think like this. Even right things make you worried and every thing you take on your ego.

So,please shed this kind of attitude as you are a senior counsel and it doesn't suit's you.

 

Peace & Cheers;))

(ESIS)

Dear Mr. Joseph Wilfred, I will be more than happy to treat you to quality non veg food at a 5-Star hotel if only you can post the Supreme Court Judgement for everyone to see. A Judgement wherein the judge has given the wife, 50% share of husband's OTHER self acquired properties BESIDES the shared household. 

Any Judge under various laws may give the deserving wife, maintenance and right to residence or an alternative residence or rent from the husband. Maintaining the daughter minor or major is the duty of the father till she starts earning or gets married.

As for the rest of your rantings in your last post is very confusing and seems to be clearly written under the influence of alcohol.

I will also gift you a bottle of whisky if you put up the entire suggested SC judgement.

In my opinion what Biswanath Roy said is not incorrect. Advocate’s work is to save their client who pays sufficient fees.  The persons who are differing Biswanth Roy will happily jumps to take up the case of wife and advise the same thing as Biswanth Roy said, if the wife offers to pay some extra amount above the normal fees.  There will not be any ethics and moral values in Advocate profession. When Biswanath roy had advised wife to take the plea of having her share in the property of husband, the counsel of the husband is at liberty to disprove the same by using his legal knowledge.  That is the procedure of Advocacy and it is nothing to do with moral or ethical values. There are no spiritual or Vedanta classes are going on.

 

For example if a person rapes and murders a woman and then comes to the Advocate to take up the case, will any Advocate refuses to take up the case with an excuse of moral and ethical values.  It is the duty of the Advocate to save the accused from the charges of the prosecution.  

I completely respect what Ravinder P. has just said. But he has started his reply with "In my opinion what Biswanath Roy said is not incorrect. Advocate’s work is to save their client who pays sufficient fees. "

On this forum, there are no fees paid for any advice and so one ecpects only the correct, ethical and right advice. 

My point is that any advocate on this forum is not fighting a case against the prosecution as in court but only guiding the querists who come to this forum for truthful, honest opinions. They dont charge fees and do this voluntarily then why not give the right and ethical guidance in the true spirit of the forum to help the querists.

 

I take it a privilege to refer a Suit decreed by the Calcutta High Court in the year 1953 by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Gopendra Krishna Mitra ( who was also an eminent Judge of the Supreme Court of India ).  The brief facts of the case was that the husband has a big building at Calcutta which is self purchased property. but to deceive his children and wife he made a paper publication to sell the property.  The wife rushed to the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court and claimed that  she gave her valuable ornaments to her husband to purchase the property ( although subsequently she could not prove by evidence )and pray for appointment of a Receiver.  Immediately the Hon'ble Judge appointed receiver.  On the wife's side Senior Barrister Mr. Amal Kumar Chakrabortty appeared ( who was also became Judge of the Supreme Court of India ) and on the husband side Mr. Ashok Kumar Sen, Barrister appeared ( who was also Ex-Law Minister of India, and Ex-President of Supreme Court Bar Association )

SUIT NO.3481 OF 1953 ( Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction)

Now , my humble question to my erudite scholar friends who so far deviating from all norms of professional ettiquete threw sloughy muds upon my gabardine with various objectionable words will they agree with the proverb " YOUR MANNER INDICATES YOUR IDENTITY "

My learned friend has taken the privilege to refer a Suit decreed by the Calcutta High Court in the year 1953. The details of the case has been outlined.

Can we please see the final outcome of this case ?

In the end , Did the wife benefit from this litigation except spending valuable years and lakhs of rupees ??

The facts of illustrated case are different from the original author's queries. What is the point of deviating from the main topic to show how effectively the law can be distorted to interpret in your favour !!! 

If the businessman tried to sell the building where a part was occupied by his wife & children are residing then court will protect their interest undoubtedly. There are many laws for that today.

 

 

First let me answer your question one by one:

1. Is there any rights to Mrs. Suma or her children (one adult) over the assets of Mr.Rakesh (alive)?

Neither Mrs. Suma nor her children have any right over the self acquired properties of Mr.Rakesh during his life time.

2. Does this not amount to domestic violence under "Th protection of Women from domestic violence Act"

There is no violence at all in it, it is his own property hence he is dealing with it as per his own sweet will. Hence the provision of the said act will not attract to this.

3. Is there any legal procedure to stop the further selling of assets by Mr. Rakesh.

Legally you cannot stop him indulging in such activities, but through the talks by elders and his friends, something can be done, try it.

 

Doesn't the random, wasteful selling of assets amounting to threaten the economic stability of Mrs.Suma amounts to economic violence(as in Domestic Violence Act) by her husband?

What is economic stability and economic offence to do with Mrs. Suma if her husband is on the selling spree of his own property?,  She has to convince him by adjusting and compromising on few domestic issues that are being disputed by both husband and wife, this way she can find some respite.

 

Next thing is that in case he fails to to give her proper money for running the domestic house-hold, she may file a maintenance petition seeking money to run the family under the provisions of section 125 Cr.PC.  She cannot take law into her hands by forcing him or threatening him to stop indulging from dealing with his properties in the way he decides so.

Though the family sentiments are different to that of the law. one should note the circumstances that forced him to take such drastic steps to dispose his properties one by one, because he knew the difficulties of acquiring them and he cannot be foolish enough to dispose it off this way, so the problems can be sorted out on talks by the intervention of elders and friends, try that.