Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Damayanti (Unemployed)     07 April 2011

Marriage Act Amendment Bill:- Share in property in divorce!

There is a report submittedby Ms Jayanti Natarajan in Rajyasabbha (on 6th April as per the news paper.)

 

It say that 'share in husband's property, acquired during marriage, be given to Spouse'

 

It needs an equitable amendment as:-

 

'Adequate/equal Share in BOTH Spouse's property, acquired during marriage, be given to BOTH Spouses'

 

I.e. Husband's and wife's property should be taken into consideration together and it should be split.

Not only husband's property be split. Even wife's property should be equally split! 

 

Hence word 'husband' should be replaced by word 'spouse' and word 'wife' be replaced by 'other spouse/marital partner'.

 

Thus .... it becomes really gender neutral like sec 24 of HMA.

 

Unless above changes are made ... Above amendments would be vehemantly opposed by all indian hindu males.

 

Hence women should should be considerate!!, so that atleast above suggested amendments would go through peacefully without any hurdles!!

(Anyways mejority of wives won't have their personal property in their single name more than their husbands!!)

 

(Legal provisions already in place, in GOA, since a long time!!), wife should have EQUAL share in husbands ancestral property also (rather both spouse should have EQUAL share in their counterpart's ancestral property also )

 

Again it will make it gender neutral!!

 

Also Kids (which also include step kids e.g. half blood or uterine blood) as well as adopted kid should have have equal share in both parent's property as well as their ancestral property.

 

 

Above to be read as '........In the event of divorce between spouse'.

 

 

Share should be equal (E.g. 50-50 if no kids and if there arelet's total 3 kids, then each memeber gets 20%)

 

It would also abolish concept of stree-dhan as anyways she would get a share in property as above and hence even stree-dhan, dowry etc would be split equally as above!!

    



Learning

 16 Replies

Ambika (NA)     07 April 2011

Panel backs changes in marriage Bill

6 April 2011

statesman news service
NEW DELHI, 6 APRIL: The parliamentary standing committee on personnel, public grievances, law and justice has supported the Marriage Laws Amendment Bill, 2010, on introducing “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” as a new ground for divorce but opposes doing away with the “cooling off” period of six months before filing the joint divorce motion.
 Releasing the committee’s recommendations, its chairperson, Mrs Jayanthi Natarajan, told reporters the Bill proposed to amend the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the Special Marriage Act, 1954. The committee’s report was tabled in Parliament in the Budget session.
 She said the committee after interacting with various groups accepted the new ground of “irretrievable breakdown of marriage” for grant of a decree of divorce. The committee did not however agree with the Bill’s provision to do away with the waiting period of six months.
 The committee was of the view that the existing provisions of law for divorce by mutual consent were “fair and reasonable and the prevailing cooling off period be retained so as to protect and preserve the institution of marriage”, she said. Mrs Natarajan said “we think the six months period is necessary. In many cases, people are not aware of their legal rights.” To ensure that there was uniformity in the application of the provision, she said the committee wanted “irretrievable breakdown” defined in the law. The phrase was not defined in the Bill and in its absence the courts could follow different standards. Even the term “grave financial hardship” needed to be defined in the Bill to protect interests of women, she said. The existing laws allowed women to oppose divorce on the ground that it could cause them grave financial hardship but in the absence of a clear definition, the phrase could be interpreted differently.
 The committee found there was provision for alimony but on the issue of distribution of property, the “matrimonial property” ~  the property acquired by a couple during the subsistence of marriage ~ was not defined. In the West it was described as “community of
property,” she said. This definition was needed as women contributed to a home through their care, while the men bought assets with their income.
 The committee had not made any recommendation on this, she said, but wanted the Bill to provide for an effective legal mechanism for a fair and equitable division of property, so that women got their due share. Making another suggestion, she said the committee wanted the Bill to clarify the position of the adopted children after divorce.
The committee found that the Bill mentioned provisions for the maintenance of the children born out of marriage, leaving out the case of adopted children.
Comments (0)
2 Like

Damayanti (Unemployed)     07 April 2011

Thanks to Ambika.

 

 

...The property acquired by a couple during the subsistence of marriage ~ was not defined. In the West it was described as “community of property,” she said. This definition was needed as women contributed to a home through their care, while the men bought assets with their income...

 

Hence it should 50-50 split of  “community of property” (property acquired by both be considered for split-up!! whether or not there was direct contribution by either of spouse in theircounterpart's property. Indirect contribution is but obvious. Two were looking after two different fronts during conjugal life. So wife's contribution in household activities played a big role in financial prosperity of husband!!)

 

 

 

2 Like

Ambika (NA)     07 April 2011

imagine a situation where wife does not have clear ( she may have tentative knowledge)  knowledge about husband's property....a situation when husband would start buying property in his parents' or siblings' name --it is very much possible. How would one prove where are the properties and how much in that scenario? Husband may also buy property after deserting wife so that she is completely in dark about what property has been accumulated.

It may happen with some husbands also.

Good thing that household work is being recognised in terms of property rights.

Only very smart women would stand to gain who from the beginning keep track of husband's investments and the whereabouts of his property. Rest who lack information...would grope in drak while relinquishing their own visible assets and properties( Stri Dhan is always made visible). Is the bill clear on that aspect?????? or should not it be clear on that aspect too?????????

 

 

Deep (k)     07 April 2011

Women contributed to a home though their care..........

in above case there should be time period to be included...... the marriage should atleast be lasted some say 3/5 years minimum.......

 

what a woman can contributed within 3 months / 6 months / 1 year of marriage and separated and then divorce

also in few other countries I think there is 10 years of marriage required even for (parmanent) maintenance......

 

anyway atleast some changes are happening......... to give property to wife on top of maintenance as she will not have much property in her name :)........

Roshni B.. (For justice and dignity)     07 April 2011

woman's property (streedhan)is already divided on a 80:20 basis after marriage ceremony,ie,80 percent for saas and 10-20 percent for bahu.it remains divided likewise even when she is thrown out of her house.

now we want 50% of this bahu's bachi kuchi property(if she has)to go to husband?

 

naaaaaa .... not fair!

1 Like

Bhartiya No. 1 (Nationalist)     07 April 2011

It is well said that " there is an woman behind every successful man".  So whatever asset been made after marriage be divided equally.

charishma (manager)     09 April 2011

okeez. yes it is acceptable for both husband and wife. property of wife may be equally distributed to husband iff wife gets her share in husband's property.

what is the latest status. whether bill get passed or not? when this 'equitable distribution of property' recognise in indian courts???  

amit pandey (Architect)     09 April 2011

pl clear one point as someone is suggesting that wife cant claim in self aquired property.....then wat does this article mean????????? pl clearify

Tajobsindia (Senior Partner )     09 April 2011

@ to All


1. If writers are talking vehemently of EQUITY then why not equally distribute PROPERTY OF FIL also since the wife is already having legal share in her own father's property even after marriage and also even at the time of divorce so when she is asking equitable distribution of husband's acquired property at the time of her divorce then why not same wife also gives her share from her father's side to husband too and why keep quite on that part ! 


There are daily cases in society where after marriage of daughter her father has acquired properties so why not that share to now soon to become ex Husband?


2. The Law is already there for a daughter (married) to get from her father her shares that  Women Organisations donot want to strictly get implemented but now wants to create a social confusion how to equally divide husbands property at the time of her divorce which is what is called opportunity of @ metro wife!.


So in immediate future what will happen either Indian husbands will not buy any property and or wqhat he will do is to create a Trust, he will say instead of division of self acquired property at the time of IrBM let the property go to a Trust so end result @ metro wife still will not get such property rights and forget her fathers property shares to her which they have till date not got implemented by any agitation and or representation before various acting Bodies which to me sounds good in one way because @ metro women tend to get more greedy and end up creating more social confusions at the end of their so called frivilous march.

3. See Laws are already well placed in our society all they needs is strict accountability and judicial activism to get them implemented as for whom they were made instead of endless debates in internet forums please. Shoot (each one of you writers) RTI Application to various bodies on collecting datas first and based on which seek implementation details on these questions the more you all shoot RTI the Govt. wakes up when they see from left and right same que. coming from RTI applicants pan India that is first wake up call one. If any one of you need drafting help on such RTI’s I can free of cost volunteer for your own good otherwise I am cool I know what is real picture in society if property rights is the bone of contention here in this thread.


Now kindly donot outplace rural married womens’ stories and seek metro wife sympathy and end result as you asked is that, the RS Debate is shelved as of date because of two primary reasons;

A) Husband must also be able to claim financial hardship

B) Financial hardship must be objectively defined.     


So any more debates you @ metro wifes need to hear, do whistle me, I may come on board against it purely on equity grounds not frivilous grounds as projected by Majlis and Lawyers Collective so do understand first where the main issues rests then let us jumb on the debate wagon.

Deep (k)     09 April 2011

@tajobsindiasir

great analysis.........

 

 

@ROSHANI

who told streedhan is divided in 80-20........ this is a platform less sentence.......(if you have seen in your friends case........ we have also seen in our friends case.......)

Also here property division is at the time of divorce...... do you means streedhan is divided 80-20 at the time of divorce gr8888 :) - in 2011 you can't throw any metro wife out of house by kicking, they pack their bags well plan and go........ no you can't say they are thrown out without anything....... and metro wife mostly lives in nuclear family witout in-laws where everything is in her hand (> 80%)..........

prabir (professor)     23 July 2014

Marriage Act Amendment Bill is an enterprising Law for married women who wants to be rich. Marry first,  followed by divorce and own 50% of property.  Repeat  the procedure two three times and wow!!!! you are rich. 

The State should not get involved in personal life of people. More  state intervention will cause more matrimonial and legal frictions. Statistics suggest that after infusing christian matrimonial jurisprudence  in to Hindu personal law has  triggered more divorce cases in India, The 2010 Bill will bring more legal disaster into matrimony then it intent to solve. Some legislatures think matrimony as commercial partnership firm where parties invest s*x to produce child and on the event of divorce women can treat children as mortgaged property; husband has to payback for free s*x and claim 50% of property as dividend from the partnership. In future, men  will prefer live-in relationship or will draw contract to with women for s*x and progeny  and not beyond.

rebellion (fighting against bias law)     23 July 2014

If these kind of bill will pass then After few year we will see all metros will be full by lady Ambanis and lady tata and they all will have same business.

Don't laugh or it could be rude but bitter truth.

sooraj (none)     24 July 2014

It will also make lawyers rich..


Among Christians divorce is very less in number. But Hindus are living in court-room..


Originally posted by : prabir

Marriage Act Amendment Bill is an enterprising Law for married women who wants to be rich. Marry first,  followed by divorce and own 50% of property.  Repeat  the procedure two three times and wow!!!! you are rich. 

The State should not get involved in personal life of people. More  state intervention will cause more matrimonial and legal frictions. Statistics suggest that after infusing christian matrimonial jurisprudence  in to Hindu personal law has  triggered more divorce cases in India, The 2010 Bill will bring more legal disaster into matrimony then it intent to solve. Some legislatures think matrimony as commercial partnership firm where parties invest s*x to produce child and on the event of divorce women can treat children as mortgaged property; husband has to payback for free s*x and claim 50% of property as dividend from the partnership. In future, men  will prefer live-in relationship or will draw contract to with women for s*x and progeny  and not beyond.

DV Act Buster (CEO)     25 July 2014

This bill has lapsed in the last lok sabha with the congress government. It has been reintroduced in July 2014 as a private member's bill in the parliament but may take years as it will have to be discussed from scratch. Bills introduced privately by a member has no priority.

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads


Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query