Wife

No rights on ancestral property but husband rights have on self acquired property

I am not a alwyer but there are many if and else simply if u prove she deserted without any reason ,she cant claim anything

she cant claim any rights on both your ancestral property and self aquired one.as far as the latter is concerned though she had contributed 25% of the amount meant for aquiring the property since the property had been registered on your name she cant lay any claim on it.

In the event of you get divorce decree, she has got a right to file application for permanent alimony (U/s. 25 HMA).  In permanent alimony application, as per the existing law, even though she is not entitled to 50% of your properties, but the amount calculated by the court will be on the basis of your immovable and movable properties and your earnings. 

i agree with prabahakar ji advice

Dear querist,

U have mentioned that U have given all her money back.Can U tell me the reasons and also the mode  of payment U made her? No right on any ancestral property,but only on the properties purchased during marital life.(Yours 75% and her's 25% is immaterial),

In one judgment I remember Supreme court had ruled that wife will now have right in ancestral property of husband.Government was planning to amend the act, but I am not updated on this  issue. Please check from the rule books or a local lawyer.

Wife has no right in self acquired property, but she normally stakes claim that she also invested.

If your property is in delhi allotted by DDA after 2001 you got to add wifes name. It is law .All DDAallotm,ent aredeemd to be joint with spouse.

Wife has right to seek alimony  unless otherwise she is deserter. 

Amount of maintenance depends upon her income , your income and life style expenses. For example if Metro more, if small town less.

Wife to get share in man's ancestral property too By Express News Service - NEW DELHI Published: 18th July 2013 09:33 AM Last Updated: 18th July 2013 09:33 AM Email0 Marriage laws are set to become more women-friendly with the Union Cabinet on Wednesday approving a slew of measures, including providing for sufficient compensation to wife and children from husband’s ancestral property in case of a divorce. To put an end to prolonged legal battles in divorce cases, the Cabinet also approved a proposal that allows courts to exercise discretion in granting divorce after three years if one of the partners does not move a second ‘joint application’ for divorce with mutual consent. The two major amendments were recommended by the Group of Ministers, headed by AK Antony, on Marriage Laws (Amendment) Bill to bring parity in laws prevailing in various states. The GoM was asked to decide whether a court can work out “sufficient compensation” for a woman from her husband’s ancestral property in case of divorce which takes place on grounds of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage.” While the bill has a provision for share in husband’s self-acquired property, a new clause – 13F – was discussed by the GoM. It felt in case ancestral property cannot be divided, the woman should get “sufficient compensation” from her husband’s share. The compensation can be decided by court. “A provisio 13 (b) 2 has also been added which gives judge the discretion to take ex parte decision on granting divorce if one of the two parties refuse to move a joint application. This does not mean divorce will come into effect. It means the court may grant divorce in such a situation,” an official said.

so pleae check latest status. All the best

The estranged wife seeking divorce is not entitled for a share in the ancestral property of her husband even in permanent alimony.

Of course she has a claim in the property jointly owned by husband and wife in proportion to their share (registered) in the property.

Otherwise, the marriage laws amendment bill granting share in the self acquired property of the husband is yet to see the light of the day where she can have a claim in the property acquired by husband during subsistance of their marraige.

The estranged wife seeking divorce is not entitled for a share in the ancestral property of her husband even in permanent alimony.

Of course she has a claim in the property jointly owned by husband and wife in proportion to their share (registered) in the property.

Otherwise, the marriage laws amendment bill granting share in the self acquired property of the husband is yet to see the light of the day where she can have a claim in the property acquired by husband during subsistance of their marraige.