Ryze - Business Networking Get a Coderbuddy developer now
www.coderbuddy.com

"I Highly Recommend Them" - Magnitude.io CEO; US timezone; affordable rates; Silicon Valley leadership
Get your software built!
Buy Ethereum and Bitcoin
Get started with Cryptocurrency investing
Home Invite Friends Networks Friends classifieds
Home

Apply for Membership

About Ryze


Legal Needs [This Network is not currently active and cannot accept new posts] | | Topics
[Info] On legalising Live-InsViews: 136
Oct 11, 2008 3:42 am re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: re: [Info] On legalising Live-Ins

Vijay Nair
I don't see how this new law will benefit women. Like many other male-centric laws made by males it will only benefit males.

- This is an amendment to the existing law. I suppose, this law as it existed and as it is sought to be amended is only making the society less male-centric. What if this law of maintenance wasnt there in the first place?

1) Even a legally wedded wife has tough time in securing her alimony. How Mrs. No 2 will establish that she was 'living-in' and that too for what can be interpreted as a 'reasonably long' time? Young single men men share a room and expenses. If a man does the same with a women does it give her special rights?

- There are many factors that go into delay or difficulty in securing alimony. For every one case that gets battled out in courts for years, there are two which gets decided in two hearing. Of course, those who read newspapers for their daily dose of law do not get to know about it. If Mrs. No. 1 has a hard time securing alimony, it doesnt mean that Mrs. No. 2 should be kept off her rights. The words "reasonable", "reasonably", and the like appear in umpteen number of statutes. In almost all of them, the Courts have held that there could be no strait-jacket formula to prescribe a definite period to "reasonable". In this particular instance, reasonability would have to be deciphered from circumstances and I am sure as this law would evolve, the norms would stand prescribed. We are looking at a "man-woman" "married-like" relationship here. It is far removed from "two-young-men-sharing-a-room-expenses" situation. Therein lie the "special rights".


2) What if the relation is not for a reasonobly long time but the burden of relation ship- like a child born out of wedlock or the society knows about the relationship and the lade can nomore find a man?

- This "what-if" is dealt with elsewhere in law. Delving upon it would be digressing from the main issue being dealt here. Fow every law and situation, there is a "what-if". That way, the list becomes endless.


3)Till now legally wedded wife has hope that law against double marraige will protect her from the other women. With this new law such protection has become illusory. If Mrs no 2 is enterprising, she gets what she needs without really marrying.

- The protection you talk about is actually a deterrent. The deterrent remains. Read sections 493 to 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. In a changing and evolving society the legislature has to keep pace so as to tackle new evils and new cons. IMHO, this amendment is a step in the right direction. What is Mrs. No. 1 is more enterprising ?


4) Even if Mrs no 1 asserts her rights and re-gains her man, albeit after a money draining legal battle, her husband's wealth is already reduced substantially by the maintainance demand.

- "asserting her right and regaining her man" is not a provision available in law. The possible remedies available are maintenance and divorce. If it ends in a settlement, it is the wisdom of the parties involved.


5) Rights of the children born through Mrs no 2 will add another dimension of complication. Her children's rights will be logical corroloray of Mrs No 2 's rights.

- As Ritu says, their rights are already recognised.


6) In a society which is still male dominated, this law will make it easier for men to procure another women and desert his first wife,she left with no legal defense until she proves the living-in.

- This is too hypothetical a presumption to answer objectively.

This is typical of several backword laws we have which instead of letting poeple live an orderly life, hands them a legal baggage they never intend to deal with.

- This is not being imposed. Its an option being provided, which one can avail of. Would society be a good place to live in if this werent there?


In a lighter vein other immediate threat is that Ekta Kapoor will inflict a modified version of her soaps- Saas and livin-in Bahu mega serials are going to hit you.

- I guess its the other way round. It is her serials that are now inspiring life.

Private Reply to Vijay Nair (new win)





Ryze Admin - Support   |   About Ryze



Ryze Android preview app

Testing Gets Real: blog on A/B testing, building businesses with feedback loops, by Adrian Scott

© Ryze Limited. Ryze is a trademark of Ryze Limited.  Terms of Service, including the Privacy Policy