Mcd terms and what is its implication
ganesh
(Querist) 23 February 2012
This query is : Resolved
In mcd terms
1. father shall not avail right of access of minor children now and in future
2.wife is not entiltled to claim any maint. for minor children
What is its implication
a.can mother can not claim maint in future?
b. can father shall never access of his childeren in future?
Experts please reply.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 23 February 2012
a. She can claim.
b. Until the order is modified, he cannot access.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 23 February 2012
CHANGES WITH CHANGE OF CIRCUMSTANCES.
ON APPLICATION, COURT CAN MODIFY PREVIOUS ORDER
ganesh
(Querist) 23 February 2012
WHAT IS A TIMELIMIT FOR APPLICATION?
ganesh
(Querist) 23 February 2012
IF IN ORDER, PARTIES DO NOT HAVE ANY OTHER CLAIM OF WHATSOEVER NATURE AGAINST EACH OTHER , CAN EVEN WIFE CLAIM IN FUTURE?
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 23 February 2012
Both the conditions can change with the change of circumstances.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
Adv.R.P.Chugh
(Expert) 24 February 2012
Both the terms would not stand the test of judicial scrutiny if challenged.
As regards maintenance - a woman cannot barter away her right of maintenance is what the courts say. It is an agreement that courts consider against public policy and hence unenforceable, which is something I personally find not correct. If the amount is not illusory and quite all right - there is no reason she should be allowed to backtrack, and let me tell you i've seen cases where husbands who do that are arm-twisted by contempt proceedings. However she would not be able to claim the same in S.125 - which clearly bars such an application. Though S.25 HMA would still be open to her
Secondly : Child Custody orders are always interim - never permanent - capable of being altered as per changed circumstances.
A father can never give up his right to meet or access to his children. Such agreement is also against public policy.
Rajeev Kumar
(Expert) 24 February 2012
Yes it can be modified on the prayer of parties subjected to the consideration of the court.
Deepak Nair
(Expert) 24 February 2012
The learned experts have correctly advised. Nothing more to add.
M/s. Y-not legal services
(Expert) 24 February 2012
