manohar" post=233633]

There would be clauses, sub-clauses and technicalities before they would reach to a bill, later while they'll debate there would be many more points added. Let's see how it takes shape and how long it takes. How about property, which belongs to joint family, how would they come to a conclusion for a share to divorced wife?

I think all the properties bought jointly is to be shared jointly regardless of separation or divorce..

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-02-06/india/31030086_1_laws-maintenance-amount-panel

Here comes the first point 'jointly'. How many people buy most of the properties jointly while the going is smooth? Now they should start doing this.

I guess I worded it wrongly sunil, actually it is all properties bought when things were going well and both were staying together as man and wife ..[/quote]

Back to basic question, how about ancestral/joint property that is not in husband's name but he owns it indirectly? Has the wife any claim on it?[/quote]

Ancestral property rights are clear sunil - I know since we are haggling over it here ! :laugh: It passes only to children with spouses having no right over the share ![/quote]

In case the children go with woman? Would they inherit it from their grandfather in such cases?[/quote]

Regardless of where the children go and whose side they take, they get a share in the ancestral property.In fact they automatically get a right over it after the 3rd generation has passed...meaning they have a right over property if it was there in the family for 3 generations and they are the fourth..[/quote]

Here is the catch- if the children stay with mother in most cases they would never get it. Law takes such a long course that is never settled in one life span especially in property cases. I gave up my share of ancestral property without claiming it, I am happier because I do not have to spend my hard earned money on lawyers for some thing that I am not sure I would be able to get in this life.[/quote]

I dont think so, you can always claim your share of the family property if it is ancestral.If you cannot do so in your life time at least your children can do so since they belong to a generation lower.. keep all the papers

My daughter my only child stopped me from doing so, she does not live in India and would never come to claim it either.

manohar" post=233633]

There would be clauses, sub-clauses and technicalities before they would reach to a bill, later while they'll debate there would be many more points added. Let's see how it takes shape and how long it takes. How about property, which belongs to joint family, how would they come to a conclusion for a share to divorced wife?

I think all the properties bought jointly is to be shared jointly regardless of separation or divorce..

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-02-06/india/31030086_1_laws-maintenance-amount-panel

Here comes the first point 'jointly'. How many people buy most of the properties jointly while the going is smooth? Now they should start doing this.

I guess I worded it wrongly sunil, actually it is all properties bought when things were going well and both were staying together as man and wife ..

Back to basic question, how about ancestral/joint property that is not in husband's name but he owns it indirectly? Has the wife any claim on it?[/quote]

Ancestral property rights are clear sunil - I know since we are haggling over it here ! :laugh: It passes only to children with spouses having no right over the share ![/quote]

In case the children go with woman? Would they inherit it from their grandfather in such cases?[/quote]

Regardless of where the children go and whose side they take, they get a share in the ancestral property.In fact they automatically get a right over it after the 3rd generation has passed...meaning they have a right over property if it was there in the family for 3 generations and they are the fourth..[/quote]

Here is the catch- if the children stay with mother in most cases they would never get it. Law takes such a long course that is never settled in one life span especially in property cases. I gave up my share of ancestral property without claiming it, I am happier because I do not have to spend my hard earned money on lawyers for some thing that I am not sure I would be able to get in this life.[/quote]

I dont think so, you can always claim your share of the family property if it is ancestral.If you cannot do so in your life time at least your children can do so since they belong to a generation lower.. keep all the papers

My daughter my only child stopped me from doing so, she does not live in India and would never come to claim it either.[/quote]

Of course it is a personal choice but what is rightfully yours should belong to you and youngsters may not realise the importance of it now but later a time comes when they think differently, that has been my experience ..

manohar" post=233633]

There would be clauses, sub-clauses and technicalities before they would reach to a bill, later while they'll debate there would be many more points added. Let's see how it takes shape and how long it takes. How about property, which belongs to joint family, how would they come to a conclusion for a share to divorced wife?

I think all the properties bought jointly is to be shared jointly regardless of separation or divorce..

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-02-06/india/31030086_1_laws-maintenance-amount-panel

Here comes the first point 'jointly'. How many people buy most of the properties jointly while the going is smooth? Now they should start doing this.

I guess I worded it wrongly sunil, actually it is all properties bought when things were going well and both were staying together as man and wife ..

Back to basic question, how about ancestral/joint property that is not in husband's name but he owns it indirectly? Has the wife any claim on it?

Ancestral property rights are clear sunil - I know since we are haggling over it here ! :laugh: It passes only to children with spouses having no right over the share ![/quote]

In case the children go with woman? Would they inherit it from their grandfather in such cases?[/quote]

Regardless of where the children go and whose side they take, they get a share in the ancestral property.In fact they automatically get a right over it after the 3rd generation has passed...meaning they have a right over property if it was there in the family for 3 generations and they are the fourth..[/quote]

Here is the catch- if the children stay with mother in most cases they would never get it. Law takes such a long course that is never settled in one life span especially in property cases. I gave up my share of ancestral property without claiming it, I am happier because I do not have to spend my hard earned money on lawyers for some thing that I am not sure I would be able to get in this life.[/quote]

I dont think so, you can always claim your share of the family property if it is ancestral.If you cannot do so in your life time at least your children can do so since they belong to a generation lower.. keep all the papers

My daughter my only child stopped me from doing so, she does not live in India and would never come to claim it either.[/quote]

Of course it is a personal choice but what is rightfully yours should belong to you and youngsters may not realise the importance of it now but later a time comes when they think differently, that has been my experience ..[/quote]

I want to stay away from it, although you have said nothing wrong. I am sure my daughter too would never need to claim that property as well. To top it all she has perfect relations with all of them despite all this. She never showed that she would ever need a single paisa from them.

AS long as couples do not separate, the proposal is okay. But such proposal may be misused by many women and some men also. These days all women are not as pious or family oriented like traditional Indian women for whom marriage is one time affair. If such woman is deserted, the proposal is justified and she will get her due share.

But think of flirt and unfaithful women. Many of these may make marriage a profession tool to win fortune. They may marry only to separate for getting share in husband's property. Such women may win big fortune by second, third or fourth marriage. There are also chances of men marrying rich women with similar intention.

In fact, traditional men and women believing in sanctity of marriage hardly need the protection given by proposed law. The ultra modern women and even men may use the proposed law for winning fortune. So better discard the proposed law.

AS long as couples do not separate, the proposal is okay. But such proposal may be misused by many women and some men also. These days all women are not as pious or family oriented like traditional Indian women for whom marriage is one time affair. If such woman is deserted, the proposal is justified and she will get her due share.

But think of flirt and unfaithful women. Many of these may make marriage a profession tool to win fortune. They may marry only to separate for getting share in husband's property. Such women may win big fortune by second, third or fourth marriage. There are also chances of men marrying rich women with similar intention.

In fact, traditional men and women believing in sanctity of marriage hardly need the protection given by proposed law. The ultra modern women and even men may use the proposed law for winning fortune. So better discard the proposed law.

That is looking at the proposed bill and its negative impacts, similarly when you look at the positive side, it does make a woman a more secure now and a husband cannot take her for granted.I am sure that some women are bound to take advantage and so do some men who marry rich women...When we have laws that are one sided and ancient there is need for reform so that there is fairness which in turn helps in bringing about more stability in the institution of marriage and family .

AS long as couples do not separate, the proposal is okay. But such proposal may be misused by many women and some men also. These days all women are not as pious or family oriented like traditional Indian women for whom marriage is one time affair. If such woman is deserted, the proposal is justified and she will get her due share.

But think of flirt and unfaithful women. Many of these may make marriage a profession tool to win fortune. They may marry only to separate for getting share in husband's property. Such women may win big fortune by second, third or fourth marriage. There are also chances of men marrying rich women with similar intention.

In fact, traditional men and women believing in sanctity of marriage hardly need the protection given by proposed law. The ultra modern women and even men may use the proposed law for winning fortune. So better discard the proposed law.

That is looking at the proposed bill and its negative impacts, similarly when you look at the positive side, it does make a woman a more secure now and a husband cannot take her for granted.I am sure that some women are bound to take advantage and so do some men who marry rich women...When we have laws that are one sided and ancient there is need for reform so that there is fairness which in turn helps in bringing about more stability in the institution of marriage and family .

Sorry to intervene but most of the cases in north are being initiated by girl's side on false grounds claiming big money and going for settlement out of the court. They win it easily because the charges are of such nature that one never wants to keep involved for longer periods. Almost 70% cases are false and go in favor of girl.

AS long as couples do not separate, the proposal is okay. But such proposal may be misused by many women and some men also. These days all women are not as pious or family oriented like traditional Indian women for whom marriage is one time affair. If such woman is deserted, the proposal is justified and she will get her due share.

But think of flirt and unfaithful women. Many of these may make marriage a profession tool to win fortune. They may marry only to separate for getting share in husband's property. Such women may win big fortune by second, third or fourth marriage. There are also chances of men marrying rich women with similar intention.

In fact, traditional men and women believing in sanctity of marriage hardly need the protection given by proposed law. The ultra modern women and even men may use the proposed law for winning fortune. So better discard the proposed law.

That is looking at the proposed bill and its negative impacts, similarly when you look at the positive side, it does make a woman a more secure now and a husband cannot take her for granted.I am sure that some women are bound to take advantage and so do some men who marry rich women...When we have laws that are one sided and ancient there is need for reform so that there is fairness which in turn helps in bringing about more stability in the institution of marriage and family .

Sorry to intervene but most of the cases in north are being initiated by girl's side on false grounds claiming big money and going for settlement out of the court. They win it easily because the charges are of such nature that one never wants to keep involved for longer periods. Almost 70% cases are false and go in favor of girl.

If the boys side is innocent then they should fight it out and prove their innocence.I feel that it is not so easy to manipulate the judges and the law.There is need for concrete evidence..In MP ,A couple of such false cases filed by a lady and her brothers were dismissed, I read about it...Sunil when you are in the right there is nothing to fear that's my feeling..

There is no need for new law. When a husband deserts his wife for his own fault, wife can still claim compensation. Husband's wealth, income, living standard etc all are considered by court while granting periodical or lump sum compensation to the woman

Further to this law that is waiting to be implemented ....as expected nothing much is being done after the initial noise and excitement ...http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/news/No-panel-has-been-set-up-for-providing-equal-property-rights-among-couples-applicable-to-live-in-partners-13821.asp#.UCOdz_YgdjY

There is no need for new law. When a husband deserts his wife for his own fault, wife can still claim compensation. Husband's wealth, income, living standard etc all are considered by court while granting periodical or lump sum compensation to the woman

Yes you are right.There are already a law regarding this for compensation.