Daily Archives: May 3, 2007

Husbands not expected to compensate ex-wives for future earnings

British Law is often used as precedent In Indian Law

So… is this Judgement of any use in India, while deciding alimony cases ?

Husbands not expected to compensate ex-wives for future earnings

LONDON, April 14 A British judge has ruled ex-husbands can not be expected to compensate their ex-wives for future earnings.

The judge ruled in England, which is known for favoring women in divorce proceedings, that a baker identified as Mr. H does not have to give Mrs. H a share of his future earnings after their divorce, The Times of London reported Saturday.

Mrs. H, who was awarded nearly $26 million in cash and assets in the divorce, argued she should also be entitled to a share of her ex-husband’s future profits after their marriage fell apart due to his infidelity. She gave up her career as a teacher after their marriage to raise the couple’s children.

“This is not a case in which the wife gave up a career that was likely to provide substantial income or monetary reward,” the judge said. “She was a teacher.” The judge said Mrs. H’s contribution to her husband’s status as a high earner was small.

“His high level of income is primarily based on his talents, hard work and good fortune in pursuing his career,” he said.

Copyright 2007 by UPI




Why are men bothered about alimony ?

Why are men bothered about alimony ?

Notes : If this feminist is to be believed women do NOT get alimony easily. So why are men bothered about alimony ? is it the case of men being TOO honest ??


Law leaves women in ‘lurch’


Ranchi, April 15: When Malancha Ghosh of Mahila Utpidan Virodhi Evam Vikas Samiti, was invited to speak at the workshop held under the aegis of Jharkhand Judicial Academy, little did the organisers imagine that she would stir up a hornet’s nest.

In fact, Ghosh’s speech became so “unpleasant” for the members of the judiciary and police force, who were present at the workshop, that she was asked to cut her piece short and step down.

The workshop was a daylong affair that dealt with issues such as bigamy, divorce, alimony and custody battles and other women and family-related issues. And Ghosh spared none — not the judiciary nor the law enforcers — as she pointed out loopholes and fallacies in various cases, which never really gave the promised “justice” to the women. Also, she accused the courts and police as insensitive to women’s issues.

To make her point Ghosh narrated several incidents. She spoke of a certain case where her husband threw out a mother along with her two children. Later, when her son turned 10, the husband claimed and won the custody of the son. Afterwards, when she sought the help of the high court and Supreme Court, she was finally granted an alimony of Rs 18,000 plus Rs 3 lakh as compensation. Three years have passed since then and the woman, Ghosh pointed out, is yet to receive a penny from that amount.

Ghosh also referred to the Paharia rape case, which has been awaiting justice in the Patna High Court for the past 18 years. “A futile wait,” she added.

Malancha Ghosh also spoke of several instances where police stations have been used to solemnise and legalise second marriages, instance when a court granted a woman a meagre alimony when she sought the right to remain with her husband. And when a court sought a TI parade when medical tests prove d a case of rape. “Why was there a need for a TI parade?” wondered Ghosh, “When medical reports had confirmed rape and police did admit to raiding the village?” she asked while talking about the gang rape cases at Paharia.

Ghosh has been upsetting status quo for long at Ranchi. And she succeeded in rattling the normally unflappable judges present at the workshop. But, she had made her point. Women in this country are being denied the basic right to life, let alone life with dignity. Case in point, the paradox of an increasing population and a declining sex ratio.

Tax avoidance makes it tough to compute alimony: HC


Tax avoidance makes it tough to compute alimony: HC

Krishnadas Rajagopal

New Delhi, May 1:

A DELHI High Court Bench has found it difficult to compute the alimony to be paid by Bharat Hegde, son of the late politician Ramakrishna Hegde, to his estranged wife Saroj because Hegde, like many other self-employed people, has not fully disclosed his income.

The court said he did not disclose the full income for fear of having to pay income tax.

Hegde is believed to have interests in property and businesses worth Rs 28.5 crore.

“Unfortunately, in India, parties do not truthfully reveal their income. For self-employed persons or persons employed in the unorganised sector, truthful income never surfaces and tax avoidance is the norm,” Justice Pradeep Nandrajog, who was hearing the case, observed.

The Bench was hearing a two-year-old petition filed by Bharat challenging a court order passed on May 13, 2004 directing him to pay Rs 25,000 per month as interim maintenance to his unemployed wife, who had sought divorce on grounds of desertion and cruelty.

The family court passed the order for extending financial support to Saroj after she said “her husband was the son of Shri Ramakrishna Hegde, ex-Chief Minister of Karnataka and an industrialist operating a unit at Peeneya Industrial Estate, Stage-II, Bangalore from where he was earning at least Rs 10 lakh per month”.

Hegde contested the order in the High Court saying he was “unemployed with no source of income and totally dependent on his parents” even as his wife listed more than a dozen prime assets that he owned, mostly in Delhi, Bangalore and Mumbai.

Terming the present case as an instance of how “self-employed persons seldom disclose their true income”, the court observed that in such instances judges are forced to bank on their “prudence and wisdom” to work out the likely income of the spouse from the primary data that is made available.

Upholding the May 2004 order for payment of Rs 25,000 as monthly interim maintenance to Saroj until the final conclusion of the divorce proceedings, the Bench considered it “irrelevant” that she had sought to opt out of the marriage owing to her husband’s alleged cruelty and desertion.

“While judging the issue of interim maintenance, conduct or misconduct of either spouse is irrelevant for the reason in every proceedings of divorce, dissolution or judicial separation there is bound to be some allegations or other pertaining to matrimonial misconduct,” the court said.

It further held that the focus of inquiry should solely pertain to the financial means of either spouse. The court took “means” to include status of parties, reasonable wants of the spouse claiming financial support and the income and property of the other party and family members.

“If conduct or misconduct were to be alone considered, no spouse would get interim maintenance,” Justice Nandrajog added.

Females Will Never Lie about being Raped Down Under Either?

Via: The Honor Network

Females Will Never Lie about being Raped Down Under Either?
Priority News Exchange Program News Item (PNEP)

Same story from another part of the world:

A 17-year-old former Perth Catholic schoolboy is free after nearly a year in prison awaiting trial on rape charges of which he was acquitted after it emerged that his accuser had lied about her sex life.

Perth Now reports that Patrick Waring, then a 15-year-old Catholic college student, was dragged out of bed by police a year ago and refused bail on the say-so of his 17-year-old accuser.

However, just before the trial started, the girl admitted lying about her sex life the whole time, Perth Now says.

She had insisted she was a virgin.

DNA tests excluded Waring from her claims of rape.

Waring’s accuser finally admitted she had had sex with a man at the back of a cinema the same afternoon, two hours before claiming Waring raped her at Joondalup’s Central Park after following her from the railway station on 30 March last year.

She also admitted to having been in a sexual relationship with her boyfriend at the time.

The girl’s new story included being raped by two different men in two hours.

She said the cinema sex with a 20-year-old, who she had met on the internet, was rape, but she didn’t want him charged because it might affect her compensation claim.

The girl had previously lied to interviewing officers, the Sexual Assault Resource Centre doctor who examined her and to prosecutor Amanda Forrester.

Waring was originally denied bail when a police officer told the Children’s Court that Waring had phoned the girl and threatened her – a fact the police later admitted was wrong.

Patrick’s father, Terry Waring, said his family had been torn apart for a year. His and his wife’s belief in the justice system had been shattered.”Shoddy work, cruelty and seeming vindictiveness cost us our house, financial security and a lifetime of savings for a three-week trial,” he said.

“The emotional cost to the family has been incalculable. Personally, I have not cried as much since my brother was killed in Vietnam.””It’s the finish of school for Patrick,” Mr Waring said.

“He’s lost virtually all of Year 11 and the start of Year 12 and he’s had to grow up very fast. He lost his youth in there.”We didn’t tell anyone at school what had happened to him. He just disappeared. And now we couldn’t send him back there to face the ramifications of this.”

Patrick’s 24-year-old brother, Michael, also lost a year of study for his degree in computer science and information systems because of the ordeal.