Main objection to the Proposed “Marriage Laws (Amended) Bill,2010,
We had already submitted our objection and suggestions to parliament committee, but the present law minister totally ignore the same and even tamper the original bill even worse by making new amended, so we request either make the law gender neutral and respect natural justice or roll back the same immediately as this will became a “extraction law” than giving any natural justice to people.
A. The Bill must be gender neutral, if a wife have contribution to husbands property( movable or immovable) , any property made by wife ( movable or immovable) also have husbands contribution, so only Even in USA-Txas law the word used "Spouse" instead of wife or husband, other wise one sided law will create a disharmony, increase of crime, huge litigation in court for property disputes.
B. The benefit of divorce can't be equal to married relationship , as the obligation and responsibility after divorce change to either spouse. Even in 2010 china SC also amended the property division law to belongs to the spouse who made it , as such law made havoc in court cases and people started use the marriage as property earning business than love or care to each others.
C. Proposed Amendment: 13D (1) Where the wife is the respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, she may oppose the grant of decree on ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to her and that in all circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage…..
Our View:
Right to oppose should be given to both parties The word wife to be replaced by the word "spouse".
The line to be added: The Divorce degree will be awarded only when all other cases against each others had been quashed or withdrawn and in future no cases will be filed against each other spouse. Otherwise the basic purpose of this law to reduce the litigation will be defeated.
Like :
There are other provisions of maintenance HMA 24/25, CrPC 125, DV Act, adding another provision is duplication and a tool to harass the husband
Rampant misuse of this section to harass the husbands
As per 13C(2), if she is separated for 3 years, she would have already approached the court in case of financial difficulties.
Another attempt to extort husbands (as in 498a and DV Act).
Our Proposed: “The respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, may oppose the grant of a decree on the ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to them and that it would in all the circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage. All cases pending, between the parties would also be quashed before granting divorce under Section 13C”..All case like 498A, DV Act and other litigations should be quashed before the grant of decree.”
Text of Amendments to the Bill, See item 5: http://bit.ly/1eW8lJK
D. Proposed Amendment: 13F and 28D:( Special provisions relating to disposal of property in proceedings under 13C)
Without prejudice to any customs or usage or any other law for the time being in force, the court may, at the time of passing of the degree under section 13C on a petition made by the wife, order that the husband shall give for her and children as defined in section 13E, such compensation which shall include a share in his share of the immovable property ( other than inherited or inheritable immovable property) and such amount by way of share in movable property, if any, towards the settlement of her claim, as the court may deem just and equitable, and while determining such compensation the court shall take into account the value of inherited or inheritable property of husband.
Our View :
The word wife and husband to be replaced by spouse which followed by all over world, even in USA-Txas the same is spouse.
If this law passed as per above, for example the wife have 1000 crs ( let it be given by husband also) and husband have only 10 lacks, but as per law, her 1000 crs can't be touched, but the husband 10 lacks to be divided and given to wife? This is totally injustice and against any natural justice System of the world.
The property accrued before marriage, either spouse should not have any right, as there is no contribution of other spouse on that, the contribution to be considered only on the property made after marriage and any claim to others property to be allowed if only the marriage obligation is more than 10 years.
So Our Proposed : 13F and 28D:( Special provisions relating to disposal of property accrued during subsistence of marriage in proceedings under 13C)
"Without prejudice to any customs or usage or any other law for the time being in force, in any proceeding under section 13C, at the time of passing of the degree , the court may on a petition made by "either spouse" order that the "other spouse" shall pay for "her/his" and children as defined in section 13E, as finciancail support such gross sum or share in the movable or immovable residential property towards settlement of property rights as the court may deem it to be just and equitable, "considering the duration of marriage" and any such payment shall be secured , if necessary , by change on the immovable residential property of the other party. For any claim each others spouses residential property, the minimum marriage duration should be considered as 10 years.
E. The law should be equal and must follow the natural justice and stop making assumption that all women born in Raja Harish chandra family and all men born in criminal family.
The person seeking Divorce on "No fault Ground" , should not get the same benefit , who seek the divorce by proving other party fault. A person should not be punished for "No Fault" in the name of easy divorce nor his/her hard earned accrued property movable or immovable should be garbed under any such biased law, which will create injustice and will create more disharmony in society which in result will increase the over all crime in India.
► 11:39► 11:39
We had already submitted our objection and suggestions to parliament committee, but the present law minister totally ignore the same and even tamper the original bill even worse by making new amended, so we request either make the law gender neutral and respect natural justice or roll back the same immediately as this will became a “extraction law” than giving any natural justice to people.
A. The Bill must be gender neutral, if a wife have contribution to husbands property( movable or immovable) , any property made by wife ( movable or immovable) also have husbands contribution, so only Even in USA-Txas law the word used "Spouse" instead of wife or husband, other wise one sided law will create a disharmony, increase of crime, huge litigation in court for property disputes.
B. The benefit of divorce can't be equal to married relationship , as the obligation and responsibility after divorce change to either spouse. Even in 2010 china SC also amended the property division law to belongs to the spouse who made it , as such law made havoc in court cases and people started use the marriage as property earning business than love or care to each others.
C. Proposed Amendment: 13D (1) Where the wife is the respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, she may oppose the grant of decree on ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to her and that in all circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage…..
Our View:
Right to oppose should be given to both parties The word wife to be replaced by the word "spouse".
The line to be added: The Divorce degree will be awarded only when all other cases against each others had been quashed or withdrawn and in future no cases will be filed against each other spouse. Otherwise the basic purpose of this law to reduce the litigation will be defeated.
Like :
There are other provisions of maintenance HMA 24/25, CrPC 125, DV Act, adding another provision is duplication and a tool to harass the husband
Rampant misuse of this section to harass the husbands
As per 13C(2), if she is separated for 3 years, she would have already approached the court in case of financial difficulties.
Another attempt to extort husbands (as in 498a and DV Act).
Our Proposed: “The respondent to a petition for the dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13C, may oppose the grant of a decree on the ground that the dissolution of the marriage will result in grave financial hardship to them and that it would in all the circumstances be wrong to dissolve the marriage. All cases pending, between the parties would also be quashed before granting divorce under Section 13C”..All case like 498A, DV Act and other litigations should be quashed before the grant of decree.”
Text of Amendments to the Bill, See item 5: http://bit.ly/1eW8lJK
D. Proposed Amendment: 13F and 28D:( Special provisions relating to disposal of property in proceedings under 13C)
Without prejudice to any customs or usage or any other law for the time being in force, the court may, at the time of passing of the degree under section 13C on a petition made by the wife, order that the husband shall give for her and children as defined in section 13E, such compensation which shall include a share in his share of the immovable property ( other than inherited or inheritable immovable property) and such amount by way of share in movable property, if any, towards the settlement of her claim, as the court may deem just and equitable, and while determining such compensation the court shall take into account the value of inherited or inheritable property of husband.
Our View :
The word wife and husband to be replaced by spouse which followed by all over world, even in USA-Txas the same is spouse.
If this law passed as per above, for example the wife have 1000 crs ( let it be given by husband also) and husband have only 10 lacks, but as per law, her 1000 crs can't be touched, but the husband 10 lacks to be divided and given to wife? This is totally injustice and against any natural justice System of the world.
The property accrued before marriage, either spouse should not have any right, as there is no contribution of other spouse on that, the contribution to be considered only on the property made after marriage and any claim to others property to be allowed if only the marriage obligation is more than 10 years.
So Our Proposed : 13F and 28D:( Special provisions relating to disposal of property accrued during subsistence of marriage in proceedings under 13C)
"Without prejudice to any customs or usage or any other law for the time being in force, in any proceeding under section 13C, at the time of passing of the degree , the court may on a petition made by "either spouse" order that the "other spouse" shall pay for "her/his" and children as defined in section 13E, as finciancail support such gross sum or share in the movable or immovable residential property towards settlement of property rights as the court may deem it to be just and equitable, "considering the duration of marriage" and any such payment shall be secured , if necessary , by change on the immovable residential property of the other party. For any claim each others spouses residential property, the minimum marriage duration should be considered as 10 years.
E. The law should be equal and must follow the natural justice and stop making assumption that all women born in Raja Harish chandra family and all men born in criminal family.
The person seeking Divorce on "No fault Ground" , should not get the same benefit , who seek the divorce by proving other party fault. A person should not be punished for "No Fault" in the name of easy divorce nor his/her hard earned accrued property movable or immovable should be garbed under any such biased law, which will create injustice and will create more disharmony in society which in result will increase the over all crime in India.
Are new divorce laws anti-men? - YouTube
► 11:39► 11:39
No comments:
Post a Comment