Man woman and child
Myrl Mitchell
(Querist) 18 May 2015
This query is : Resolved
Dear Advisors,
I need advice on how to proceed with the following. I have been in a relationship with a man for the last 15 years, during this 15 years, I have a 8 year old child. We have been living together as man and wife. Now he wants to walk out of this relationship because he is not happy. He was previously separated from his wife, whom he also has an issue from, now the girl is an adult 21 years old. What are my chances for a case here, and how can I secure my son's future. Besides the mental stress to an 8 year old and mental torture to me. I am working, but holding a contract job for 6 months, am on the 3 month. He is still around, but says he will leave by the 1st of the month, but no further clearance on what will happen to me or his son. He just wants freedom. Can he get that ? He did not marry me even after my son was born,but always assured me that he would not return back to his wife. Now all of a sudden the interference of his daughter and wife is causing he to come to a decision of leaving us. I have invested 15 years of my life with him am nearing 50 in a couple of years, what will I do jobwise and upkeep my for child. Also in while in this relationship we have invested money in a flat under construction, a combined loan has been taken from the bank for this flat. How can this be sorted out. I have no clue what are the first steps to follow and who to approach for this. Please advice. Thank you.
Isaac Gabriel
(Expert) 18 May 2015
Consult lawyer to file maintenance.
malipeddi jaggarao
(Expert) 19 May 2015
Look into the followin write-up:
NEW DELHI: Giving an important clarification on live-in relationships, the Supreme Court has said that if a man and woman "lived like husband and wife" for a long period and had children, the judiciary would presume that the two were married.
A bench of Justices B S Chauhan and J Chelameswar on Monday issued the clarification on a petition filed by advocate Uday Gupta, who had questioned certain sweeping observations made by the Madras high court while dealing with the issue of live-in relationships. Importantly, the SC said children born out of prolonged live-in relationships could not be termed illegitimate.
Gupta had challenged the HC's observation that "a valid marriage does not necessarily mean that all the customary rights pertaining to the married couple are to be followed and subsequently solemnized".
His counsel, M R Calla, sought deletion of the HC's observations terming them as untenable in law. He apprehended that these remarks could demolish the very institution of marriage.
The bench went through the judgment and said the HC's observations could not be construed as a precedent for other cases and would be confined to the case in which these were made.
Justices Chauhan and Chelameswar said,"In fact, what the HC wanted to say is that if a man and woman are living together for a long time as husband and wife, though never married, there would a presumption of marriage and their children could not be called illegitimate."
In 2010, the apex court had in Madan Mohan Singh vs Rajni Kant case said, "The courts have consistently held that the law presumes in favour of marriage and against concubinage, when a man and woman have cohabited continuously for a number of years. However, such presumption can be rebutted by leading unimpeachable evidence."
The same year, the court had in another judgment hinted at the legitimacy of children born out of such relations. "It is evident that Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act intends to bring about social reforms, conferment of social status of legitimacy on a group of children, otherwise treated as illegitimate, as its prime object."
Section 16 of Hindu Mariage Act provides,"Notwithstanding that a marriage is null and void under Section 11, any child of such marriage who would have been legitimate if the marriage had been valid, shall be legitimate, whether such a child is born before or after the commencement of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976, and whether or not a decree of nullity is granted in respect of the marriage under this Act and whether or not the marriage is held to be void otherwise than on a petition under this Act."
The above may be useful for claiming rights for your son.
As regards Bank loan in both the names, whether the property is also on both names or not? Please clarify.
Myrl Mitchell
(Querist) 19 May 2015
Yes the bank loan is in both names.
Myrl Mitchell
(Querist) 19 May 2015
Yes the bank loan is in both names.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 20 May 2015
Well advised by expert Mr. Mallipeddi Jaggarao, I agree and nothing more to add.
How much is the bank loan still outstanding? Did you speak to your partner for the amount outstanding? You are the only titleholder of the flat or it is in the name of both of you?
You can ask him to meet the outstanding by realization from selling the flat.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 21 May 2015
Expert Mr. Malipeddi Jagga Rao has thrown light to the issue sought to be clarified by the author in a proper manner with the citations of settled laws. the author may proceed to establish her rights as suggested and by consulting a local lawyer on all such further issues if her boy friend is not in any agreeable terms while parting with her company.
Biswanath Roy
(Expert) 05 June 2015
Author has legal rights to demand all benefits relating to genuinely married wife and her child can claim all rights and benefits as a legitimate child.
