LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

living relationship validity

Page no : 2

Kiran Kumar (Lawyer)     12 October 2010

now a translator joins the chorus of mentally upset people....


its quite strange that certain people want their views be accepted in every manner even if those views are contrary to law.


if you are not satisfied with legal advice being given here then who compels to visit here....you guys beg for advice and the Ld. lawyers give it to you....if you are not satisfied then visit some big office and shell out few thousand bucks to get the advice.....


you are speaking against lawyers then better make some effort and join LLB course......otherwise also if you wish to change the law it can not be done on LCI or on some other website........you should join some political party and be a part of legislative body.



dear, I ve neither referred Suchitra Ji as topper nor specifically said that your are running for i-pod........whatever you have written is your own admissions....that means you are shamelessly making a dig at a female members.....I am not raising any controversy here.  If you guys have some problem at home then better visit some psychiatrist first to get some mental help first.


most of the times you guys tend make posts which are offensive and contrary to law.  its been LCI only which is providing you free platform to express your views on legal issues and there is no else..........i-pods you can buy from market but you can not buy reputation from the market.....by throwing venom on the lawyers you are inviting trouble for yourself only.


hope you will understand.

4 Like



Very good judgement in fact i  have saved it as PDF file for further reading






The parties were married in 1972 in Punjab. In 1985, a petition for divorce by mutual consent was filed in court at Amritsar The appellant-wife alleged that she was not a consenting party, and the petition was dismissed in 1987 following an agreement on the basis of which she would be put back in the matrimonial home. However, barely three months later, the respondent husband filed a regular petition for divorce at Ghaziabad inter alia alleging adultery against his wife. The appellant-wife refuted the charge. The Court granted her maintenance pendente lite at Rs. 1,000 p.m. The husband not paving this amount, the divorce proceedings stand stayed.

On 22nd March, 1990 the appellant moved the District judge, Amritsar and was granted Rs. 6,000as litigation expenses and Rs. 2,000as maintenance pendente lite from the date of application under S. 24. She also claimed permanent alimony and maintenance under S. 25 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

On appeal, the High Court held that an application under S.

25 was not 955 maintainable as the matrimonial court at amritsar had not passed any decree for restitution of conjugal rights, judicial separation, nullity or divorce. Sequelly it quashed the order under S. 24 of the Act.

Held, where both statutes codified and clear on their subjects, liberality of interpretation cannot permit interchangeabil- ity so as to destroy distinction.

The preamble to the Hindu Marriage Act suggests that it is an Act to amend and codify the law relating to marriage among Hindus. Though it speaks only of the law relating to marriage, yet the Act itself lays down rules relating to the solemnization and requirements of a valid Hindu marriage as well as Restitution of Conjugal Rights, Judicial Separation, Nullity of Marriage, Divorce, legitimacy of children and other allied matters. Where the statute expressly codifies the law, the court as a general rule, is not at liberty to go outside the law so created, just on the basis that before its enactment another law prevailed. Now the other law in the context which prevailed prior to that was the unmodified Hindu law on the subject. Prior to the year 1955 or 1956 maintenance could be claimed by a Hindu wife through court intervention and with the aid of the case law developed.

And in order to avoid conflict of perceptions the legislature while codifying the Hindu 'Marriage Act preserved the right of permanent maintenance in favour of the husband or the wife, as the case may be, dependent on the court passing a decree of the kind as envisaged under sections 9 to 14 of the Act. In other words without the marital status being affected or disrupted by the matrimonial court under the Hindu Marriage Act the claim of permanent alimony was not to be valid as ancilliary or incidental to such affectation or disruption. The wife's claim to maintenance necessarily has then to be agitated under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 which is a legislative measure later in point of time than the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, though part of the same socio-legal scheme revolutionizing the law applicable to Hindus.


it is difficult to come to the view that a claim which is ancilliary or incidental in a matrimonial court under the Hindu Marriage Act could be tried as an original claim in that court; a claim which may for the moment be assumed as valid, otherwise agitable in the civil court under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. As said before, these two enactments keeping apart, the remaining two, i.e., Hindu Succession Act, 1956 and Hindu Minority and and Guardianship Act, 1956 are a package of enactments, being part of one socio-legal scheme applicable to Hindus. When distinctive claims are covered distinctly under two different statutes and agitable in the courts conceived of thereunder, it is difficult to sustain the plea that when a claim is otherwise valid, choosing of one forum or the other should be of no consequence.

Relief to the wife may also be due under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereunder an order of maintenance can be granted after contest, and an order of interim maintenance can be made at the outset, without much contest. This provision however has two peculiar features:

(i) the provision applies to all and not only to Hindus;

and (ii) maintenance allowance cannot exceed a sum of Rs. 500 per mensem.

But this is a measure in the alternative to provide destitute wives.

This court has ruled that if the language used in a statute can be construed widely so as to salvage the remedial intendment, the court must adopt it. Of course, if the language of a statute does not admit of the construction sought, wishful thinking is no substitute, and then, not the court but the legislature is to blame for enacting a damp squib statute.

srilakshmi (sr.structural engineer)     12 October 2010

thank you all guys!!!! but i have not got the ans . i am confused now.  i really donot understand why all are arguing on this portal, where you all are suppose to give the suggesstion.  Please guys,  give me some good suggestion.  As i understand court has approved the live in relationship. Request you all to ans me  in simple language.

R.Ramachandran (Advocate)     12 October 2010

Dear Srilakshmi,

Your query stands succinctly answered by Adv. Suchitra.  That is the current legal position in India.  While live-in reltionship has been approved by the SC, as of now there is no provision for registration of such relationships.

Sarvesh Kumar Sharma Advocate (Advocacy)     12 October 2010


thanks with respect.

1 Like




"Jab soch gehri ho jaaye to faisle kamzor ho jaate hai "

You said that " but i have not got the ans . i am confused now. "

You have  read the  above posts and get the knowledge and also knew your answer and now you confused.Most of the posts from above speaks the same solution(the common answer-you find it,read carefully ! )  so donot get confused.


LOVE AND FORNICATION ARE ALAWAYS VALID EXCERCISES {Konrad Lorenz[Nobel Laureate in Biology/Medicine}

1 Like


"Kiran Kumar's clip:


"the second guy is so frustrated from life and legal profession that he is not even aware of words he is using for other lawyers......may be he is suffering from some mental problem...."




Jamai Of Law (propra)     12 October 2010

Live-in relationship is valid as long as it does not evidently break the law and as long as there is no guilt proven as alleged.


Two married adults  and specifically a male and a female and both not married to each other (let's say, both in their seventy's or even in twenties) can stay together legally and even in the same room or same bed, as long as their respectve spouses are not able to prove that their other 'half' indulged into adultary/physical relationship, without their consent or knowledge.


There are many cases where different married people live in a shared acco in the same apartment, as an adjustment and bear their portion of rents and costs.


It does not and shud not attract IPC 497 on males and also it does not and shud not attract DV also. B'cos there is no compulsion for any anyone to stay or continue to stay in vicinity. It is by free will.


But there is no provision I believe to register it as a 'live-in'. One may , at the max, acknowledge live-in status,  by way of a joint  lease deed or as a joint property 


Any portal on any subject, those who are in that site have decided freeedom of expression. Simply calling them "insane" or mental cases doesn't help but speaks poorly of a lawyer or anybody for that matter any person. It also proves that lawyers are getting themselves frustrated on account of a collapse of the  Democratic system here. If every lawyer had enough cases and made enough money for being slightly above the poverty line, then he/she[lawyer/judge] wouldn't be here wasting time but would be minting money. Complaining to administration also speaks very poorly of a lawyer. An angry lawyer cannot be a successful lawyer. Instead of being a professional ,person he is simply a professional complainor.If Admin chucks out anybody on such frivolous complaints ,then it hardly matters as such lawyer sites have mushroomed sudenly. Tjhere are sites which give folks means of ventilating their frustrations. As Justice G.S Singhvi stated; "the rot has set in...". See it all over on the net. MIND YOU THE SITE HAS JUDGES TOO WHO MOVE I VARIOUS GARBS.




Both benches of Justice Katju and Justice Singhvi have upheld living relationships as valid. Now like Himachal Pradesh prostitution should be legalized resulting a steep drop in the prostitution business. Netherlands legal prostitution has put most prostitutes out of business. Living relationships will result in massive drop of Divorces and rendering of 498a useless. Law commission reccomended Contact Marriage Act long back. I think it will soon become a reality. In that the contract gets invoked after you pay the amount to the female as per her rules[Yet to to be elucidiated].

Kiran Kumar (Lawyer)     12 October 2010

certainly this profession does not demand anger, but certain people are more compatible with stick theory :)



chanakyam (Consultant)     13 October 2010


Hi Jamai of law,

Your statement "Two married adults  and specifically a male and a female and both not married to each other (let's say, both in their seventy's or even in twenties) can stay together legally and even in the same room or same bed, as long as their respectve spouses are not able to prove that their other 'half' indulged into adultary/physical relationship, without their consent or knowledge." is pretty much clear.

But the question here is, how one can prove the adultery or the physical relationship?  What are the means of proving it?

Let us assume, A(married man to X and not divorced) and B(married woman to Y and not divorced) are in the live-in relationship.  So what are the solutions for following possibiliteis:

1. What and how X can prove that man A has some physical relationship with  woman B. and even if she proves what kind of legal actions can be taken against man A.

2. what and how Y can prove that woman B is in adultry with man A.  if he can prove, what kind of legal actions can be taken against women B.

3.  If A and B have given a birth to a baby(A and B are not married, they are in live in relationship only), then what legal actions can be taken by their respective spouses X or Y.  How can they prove that the baby is born to A and B.  What legal provisions exist to prove that baby is born to A and B.

4. is the baby is a legitamate child or illegitamate?

srilakshmi (sr.structural engineer)     13 October 2010

This is what exactly what i want to know.  and since we both will be travelling abroad, and we want to stay together, but there is a strict rule in abroad that unmarried couple can't stay together. we want to register in india.  is this possible?,  both of our respective spouses know about this and there shouldnot be any legal action again us.  hence, we want to register this live in relationship and travel abroad.  kindly give us your valuable suggesstion.  As i understand  from all these discussion is live in relationship cannot be registered in India. is it possible to register abroad?

Thanks to all of you for your valuable suggesstions.



Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register