UNDERSTANDING IrBM IN 125 SECONDS
The Contents are here:
ORIGIN OF IrBM
Hon’ble Supreme Court in Two Judgments Announced:
Naveen Kohli vs Neelu Kohli on 21 March, 2006Before we part with this case, on the consideration of the totality of facts, this Court would like to recommend the Union of India to seriously consider bringing an amendment in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to incorporate irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for the grant of divorce. http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1643829/
Ms. Jordan Diengdeh vs S.S. Chopra on 10 May, 1985It is thus seen that the law relating to judicial separation, divorce and nullity of marriage is far, far from uniform. Surely the time has now come for a complete reform of the law of marriage and make a uniform law applicable to all people irrespective of religion or caste. It appears to be necessary to introduce irretrievable break down of marriage and mutual consent as grounds of divorce in all cases.http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/569459/
WHAT IS IrBM
NEW GROUND FOR DIVORCE. APPLICABLE ONLY TO HINDU MARRIAGE ACT & SPECIAL MARRIAGE ACT
HUSBAND CAN NOT CHALLENGE THE DIVORCE PETITION OF WIFE BASED ON FINANCIAL HARDSHIP
AS A REWARD FOR DIVORCE, MINIMUM 50% ASSETS OF THE HUSBAND WILL BE GIVEN TO THE WIFE BY LAW (not on Judge’s discretion)
ASSETS OF HUSBAND TO BE DIVIDED: PRE-MARRIAGE & POST MARRIAGE, INHERITED & INHERTIABLE – MOVEABLE & IMMOVEABLE ASSETS
EVEN WITH “NO FAULT”, THERE IS NO PROVISION OF EXCLUSIVE LITIGATION i.e. NO 498A / PWDVA2005 / CrPC 125 / etc.
WHY ROLLBACK IrBM
BILL IS ANTI-MALE
MAN HAS NO RIGHT TO CONTEST
MAN’s PROPERTY ONLY DIVIDED
EVEN IF PROPERTY IS BOUGHT BEFORE MARRIAGE
DIVISION OF MAN’s ANCESTRAL PROPERTY
DIVISION OF MAN’s PARENTAL PROPERTY
IF 1 CHILD THEN HUSBAND GETS 33%
IF TWO CHILDREN THEN HUSBAND GETS 25%
NO TALK ABOUT CHILD CUSTODY
MARRIAGE IS LEFT AS A PROPERTY DEAL
ALL THIS MAN PAYS WITH “NO FAULT”
THIS ONLY PENALIZE A HINDU HUSBAND
EVEN JUDGE HAS NO RIGHT TO DECIDE
WHY IS IrBM WRONG
While awarding Alimony under Hindu Marriage Act, the Judge takes into consideration on ONLY the Net Worth of the Husband, then why a new law required dividing the same assets? Isn't that Double Jeopardy? Alimony decisions from the Hon’ble Courts are based only on Husband’s worth while wife’s assets are not even considered.
When Domestic Violence Law defines that Economic Violence as Husband not allowing wife to work, then if a wife is MAKING PERSONAL choice of not working, why should the Husband Pay?
This Bill even doubts the capabilities of the Courts of India and hence is pushing for the percentage of Division without allowing a Hon’ble Judge to use his/her wisdom.
THIS BILL DOES NOT PROVIDE THE RIGHT OF EXCLUSIVE LITIGATION WHICH MEANS THAT EVEN WITH IrBM, MAN CAN STILL BE CHARGED WITH 498A / DOMESTIC VIOLENCE / MAINTENANCE SECTIONS / ETC.
DISCLAIMER: This Blog and Post is the Personal Opinion of the Writer and does not necessarily show or define the thought process of Save Family Foundation (Regd. NGO) or that of any other allied NGO/Trust/Group/Members opinion.