Hma amendment biill 2013 oassed by rajya sabha

Originally posted by : Tajobsindia
	1.    In my opinion “no need to panic”. 2.    This Amendment in HMA / SMA needs to be settled eventually by Hon’ble SC very soon on demands of aggrieved parties (mostly I see husband and his side of HUF, siblings) challenging the Amendment all the way to Hon’ble SC. 3.    The work load of seasoned ld. Advocates has doubled as Amendment is biased, un-Constitutional, not clear worded and leaves a lot to ld. Judges, ambiguously worded and division in self acquired and/or inherited property is not that easy when simultaneous Amendment to Hindu Succession Act is not carried out is my view. 4.    There is another grave area for seasoned ld. Advocates to challenge the Amendment which it is eventually going to leave behind i.e. “retrospective or prospective operation" just like Domestic Violence Act which still not decided in tombstone whether DV Act is retrospective or prospective by Hon’ble SC. I am amused to note this passed Amendment and soon to become a Law has infact made young married woman more weaker. Reasoning: Legislature r/w Judiciary could not give a young married daughter her natal home inherited property rights upon her marriage literally, yet in over ambition they passed on the buck now to her husband, his siblings and In-Laws to do the Orwellian un-doing.  This Law will keep a young daughter (now married without natal home inheritance) busy opting “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” as ground for divorce rest of her youthful productive years in various courts corridors when she sees not only her husband contesting but her In-laws and her husband sides siblings also contesting separately ‘saving their hard inherited properties’ against her OR a marriage now on will take place only when daughter receives her inheritance rights before marriage from her natal home on lines of equity - parity. However, the workload and good fortunes of ld. Advocates has been thus blessed in coming General Election year 2014. Amen..................

This is what i was talking earlier. Now ownwards in an event, when the IRBM is filed and if the women is seeking property rights from her husband or inlaws then she should get prepared not only to face civil case in court (from inlaws) but also other allegations that most likely she will have to face. As rightly said by the most experienced lawyer here, this bill is not properly drafted and most likely Supreme Court will amend the words described in the bill. By the way this will be never ending fight.

Just think of it this way -

A - HUSBAND

B - WIFE

C - FIL

D - MIL

B goes for IRBM on A seeking property rights. Court gives her making calculation of equal amount in alimony award.

Now C & D is not happy.

Concurrently,

Either D & C files a Civil lawsuit on A saying that they have nothing do with this. They get the stay on IRBM award filed by B until the dispute between A, C,D. is resolved.

Has anyone thought of D seeking her property rights from C ? In this case either judge will sit with calculator trying to figure out this mess or there will be lot of amendments in an event where "what happens if ?" situation arises.

For a young couple who is willing to exit without any future court litigations, this bill is not going to help especially if a women is seeking property rights. She should be ready to expect claims from their FIL/MIL before her matter is decided.

Good analysis. I disagree on the retro or prospective analysis in that the amendment clearly states that "at the time of the passing of the decree" so if a decree is already passed, this law is not applicable. If proceedings are ongoing, it is a gray area. If a trial is completed based upon one law, I find it difficult for a post-decree proceeding to be started on an amended law. Very different than DV Act.

I have a gut feeling that this will never get passed in Lok Sabha because it will never be taken up in Lok Sabha. It is just pre-election posturing.

If there is kid then it must get a roof from father to stay is what I wanted to say @Hats off to Experts

Originally posted by : Hats off to Experts
	@ Ranee.....What if husband is ready to accommodate both of them?

tab to koi case banta hi nehi...in my view ! (provided it is a permanent accomodation )

This law has direct effect on advocates as it reduces them with client.

Reasoning: Take the case of MCD. If in current act, any spouse skips 2nd motion, they hav to resubmitt the application for which they have to consult their respective lawyers and pay them fee again. With new law, it is just sufficient to file once. Even if one spouse skips 2nd motion, they need not reapply again. One spouse can apply for waive off. With this there is no need to go to 2nd motion again. So lawyers fees for the 2nd motion by skipped spouse is reduced. Also, there is no need to again ask skipped spouse to attend the court as court will decide and give judgment. Hence I think, it will reduce work for lawyers and their fees.

2. Usually 498a, dv etc are used by wife side to bend the husband side to pay hefty amount of alimony. Also it takes 5 to 7 years to fight these cases. But since now it is easy to get divorce along with handsome alimony, wife side people wont go for filing these cases. Instead they will just use new law to get divorce easily and also hefty alimony. Again with no or reduced 498a, dv etc, advocates will have less clients and cases and less fees.

This is what i think and my opinion. Only problem with the law is Property- Inheritable or inherited or husband. They should keep Inheritable or inherited or property of husband aquired by husband before the marriage, out of this section. In that case, many people can live happily as there wont be much cases(false or true), like 498a, dv etc.

The question here is, whether, divorce can be taken in 2 section. One in any of existing ground for divorce and other in this new 15c.

Please throw some light is it possible to take divorce under 2 section?

Let me tell what will happen with this new amendments.

Hypothetical situation where money extortion is the primary objective of Girls side and In-LAWS.

After marriage wife will dessert the Husband, file all cases and interim maintenance, drag cases until 3 years and convert the petition to IRBM clause, Wife gets divorce plus the handsome Alimony, plus the happiness for screwing the innocent lives of the Husband and their near and dear ones. This law doesn't give a clear clarity for the mental cruelty given by wifes during the 3 years and apply for " No fault Divorce" Is this no fault absolutely not it is clear extortion. 

IRBM clause should be used only effectively and petitions should only be accepted if there are no cases applied before ( 498A, DV, CRPC 125 , RCR, Divorce sec 13(1). then alone the statement of Kapil Sibal will hold good that this law in neutral.

Discussing about this is a sheer waste of time as we dont have a clear picture of law drafted. 

@sandykrish

I think wife must be crazy to do this. Think she apply for interim maintanance now and later convert it to 15c. 15c gives share in property only if she is having financial hardship. Since you are already paying maintainance, there should not be any finanical hardship and hence i think 15c wont stand.

Also, if she puts 498a, dv etc saying that husband and inlaws done harrasement etc, it must be proved to take the route of IRBM. Unless it is proved, judge cant give decision on 15c until 498a or dv or other cases proved. If that gets proved, husband will be inside. if not proved husband will move divorce on cruelity. in such cases, wife wont get alimony based on cruelity and 15c cannot be touched.

Also,  girls must be crazy. new section takes 3 years and after that easily gets divorce. What is the use of putting DV, 498A etc which runs for 5 to 7 years? after getting divorce, wife marries another guy. Do you think her new husband and family will allow her to fight case after divorce? if so, they must be crazy.

Only possibility is if wife takes divorce under 2 sections. one in existing ground and other in new 15c. In such cases, we need clarity.

This is just my view. Lot of exploration from various members is required here.

@ Arvind. Please note the new section is 13(C) and not 15 C.

Please go through the brief illustration given by tajobs. Dont assume things it might work in IT sector. This is Indian legal system.

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/Permanent-alimony-and-hma-amendment-87375.asp#.Uh3TvdLdf_A

I know you're also suffering from the glitch of married life, but this not the forum to confuse people. Please refrain from answering questions based on assumptions.

Please read this is a very good ruling

After filing mutual divorce petition, wife can not withdraw and ask for more money: HC

https://www.lawweb.in/2013/07/after-filing-mutual-divorce-petition.html#more

Sameer , divorcee husbands are left with no other options than this.I wonder what husband will  it take to muster courage to remarry after getting impoverished under 13C.?

Regards ASHOK

Gopal in future we will find more such cases where some wives will take up divorce and marriage as profession, courtesy honble Shri Sibal.

For other wives Mr. Sibal's gift is 'Divorce made easy and Remarriage made impossible.' Kudos to our leaders!

Regards ASHOK

Very well said Ashok. who will be dare to marry a women who has opted divorce section 13(c) . Their are professionally trained extorts. Beware of such family.

Ashok or any folks who are interested in this site can join hand with us to set up a start up which only provides information about the Divorce issues under section 13 (c). Any new groom who is interested to marry can visit this site and get the background check done. This is the only way we can stop the menace happening to male society in modern Sibal era.

Looking forward for nominations and further talks.