• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

Women Can't Expect Alimony After Having Sex With Other Men: Madras High Court

Status
Not open for further replies.

P.J.

Well-known member
Women Can't Expect Alimony After Having Sex With Other Men: Madras High Court

17th August 2015

MADURAI:The observations made in a recent judgment by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court about the need for divorced women to remain sexually disciplined to be eligible for alimony has triggered a debate among women rights activists and members of legal fraternity.

They feel that the judgment is patriarchal and has moral perspectives that may have negative ramifications on other matrimonial cases in future.

Hearing a criminal revision petition filed by a man pleading that he need not pay Rs 1,000 per month as alimony to his wife from whom he had obtained an ex-parte divorce on allegations that she was adulterous, Justice S Nagamuthu had observed, “If the wife wants to retain her right to claim maintenance from her former husband, she is expected to maintain the same discipline as she was expected during her marital ties.”

Invoking Section 125 (4) of the CrPC that states that a wife involved in adultery or one who refuses to live with husband without sufficient reasons is not entitled for alimony, Justice Nagamuthu said, “Since the man carries the obligation to maintain his divorced wife, the woman also carries the obligation not to live in a relationship with another man.”

Though the Supreme Court in Rohtash Singh vs Ramendri case in 2000 has ruled that Section 125 (4) is applicable only if the marriage is in subsistence, Justice Nagamuthu said that “in my considered view, the above judgment cannot be made applicable (in this case), because even after the decree of divorce.”

Reacting to the judgment, Madras High Court advocate Sudha Ramalingam said that the obligation for maintenance is based on the principle that the divorced woman needs economic support to sustain herself and this principle should be the primary criterion to decide on alimony.

“It may be agreeable that if a woman enters into another permanent relationship, she need not be provided alimony. But coupling that with chastity and morality is unwarranted,” Sudha said.

Claiming that the judgment can be viewed as patriarchal, advocate K Ilangovan said that even if a divorced woman is found to be involved in an adulterous relationship, that cannot be a reason to deny her alimony.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/sta...ctivists-Debate/2015/08/17/article2978444.ece

 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
What?

This does not make legal sense..cos as long as one is not remarried one can get alimony but when one is divorced one is a free to have sex without marriage.Even living in with another person does not render one disqualified for alimony as long there is NO marriage.

So why is the court playing moral police here?

It curbs the sexual freedom of a woman..does the court expect a women to lead a life of celibacy till death?

This judgement is totally chauvinistic cos it clearly implies that a women need to "behave" and be faithful to a her ex-husband to be qualify for alimony.

What about the male? Is he expected to be celibate too?

What if he is having any sexual relationships with other women..should the court ask him to double the alimony for being "unfaithful"?

Once one is divorced..the question of being celibate or "faithful" for the ex spouse does not exist anymore.

I wonder how come a judge seems not informed about this.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Claiming that the judgment can be viewed as patriarchal, advocate K Ilangovan said that even if a divorced woman is found to be involved in an adulterous relationship, that cannot be a reason to deny her alimony.

http://www.newindianexpress.com/sta...ctivists-Debate/2015/08/17/article2978444.ece


The advocate is not accurate here..why is he using the word Adulterous relationship when the woman is not married anymore.

She is legally divorced and NOT married anymore..so if she has a sexual relationship with anyone else after her divorce..its not legally called Adultery.

Adultery is having sexual relationships with another while still being legally married.
 

yesmohan

Well-known member
whether double benefit .....getting Alimony from husband and Sex from another person is

not admissible?
........." lol "
 

auh

New member
What?

This does not make legal sense..cos as long as one is not remarried one can get alimony but when one is divorced one is a free to have sex without marriage.Even living in with another person does not render one disqualified for alimony as long there is NO marriage.

The question of alimony arises in a situation where women are treated as second fiddle and subject to the domination of the male (or karta). It is due to the fact that she has lost her "virginity" by becoming a bed companion, and that without the relationship of marriage, which she now seeks to annul, she might have been better off both physically, financialy and socially. The 'stigma' of 'divorced' attaches itself to the supposedly 'weaker' sex, i.e., the female.

It is common in societies where there is a strong male dominance on customs and traditions. Men, at the drop of a hat, would start to divorce women and they would be left helpless. To prevent men from being frivolous in relationships and to maintain the integrity of marriage, alimony was used. When women become frivolous, how can this apply?

In this case, going by the reason for which alimony is granted, the wife is not entitled, legally. And as you see, adultery, on the part of the woman (if true), is a valid ground for divorce and negates the very concept of alimony.
 

tbs

Well-known member
hi

the law supports woman with alimony and free sex without marriage....
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
I know a case where a husband gets "alimony" from his wife.

Both are doctors and the mother did not want the kids and she gave them to the father and pays him "alimony" for support of children.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
In this case, going by the reason for which alimony is granted, the wife is not entitled, legally. And as you see, adultery, on the part of the woman (if true), is a valid ground for divorce and negates the very concept of alimony.

Adultery does not negate alimony.
Adultery is grounds for divorce and thats all.

I personally know a person whose wife was adulterous and they divorced on grounds of adultery.
She got custody of the children and the court ordered him to her alimony for the support of their children.
She is also working and is still having an affair with the person she got involved with.
 

auh

New member
Adultery does not negate alimony.
Adultery is grounds for divorce and thats all.

I personally know a person whose wife was adulterous and they divorced on grounds of adultery.
She got custody of the children and the court ordered him to her alimony for the support of their children.
She is also working and is still having an affair with the person she got involved with.

In law one should not generalize. In the specific case cited in the op, assuming (since nothing is mentioned) that there are no offsprings or any joint obligations arising due to the marriage, the woman cannot claim alimony.

Alimony for maintenance for the children, which is the joint responsibility of the biological parents, cannot be wished away. I presume if such a situation existed in the instant case, it would apply.

Adultery does not negate alimony.
I said that adultery on the part of the woman negates alimony. As she is the party that was the cause of the divorce, she would not be entitled to it.
 

sangom

Well-known member
< Clipped >

I said that adultery on the part of the woman negates alimony. As she is the party that was the cause of the divorce, she would not be entitled to it.

If adultery does not impinge on alimony rights from husband, then why does Supreme Court say that mere living as husband and wife, even without marriage, entitles a woman to alimony, if that arrangement is broken?
 

auh

New member
If adultery does not impinge on alimony rights from husband, then why does Supreme Court say that mere living as husband and wife, even without marriage, entitles a woman to alimony, if that arrangement is broken?

Sir, I believe that the courts presume that the live-in is also a form of arrangement (one to one and not other types), and if the relationship continues on for long and does not take the shape of adultery or concubine, it is then construed to be a relationship akin to that of marriage. If such relationship results in a progeny then the child is also eligible for inheritence (not of the ancestral property). And hence alimony is very much dealt with as if it were a marriage.

And as for your query, the simple answer is that a long term 'valid' (not as a concubine) live-in = marriage for the purposes of law. Hence the alimony eligibility. However if the relationship is not one-one (on the part of the woman, it ceases to be a live-in as per current understanding!), there is no question of alimony to the woman.

I forget to mention, and hence add now that either in a live-in or marriage the implicit or explicit trust and bonding between the two individuals that was the very basis of such a relationship, if shown to be broken by any act, by either party, would be treated as a irretrievable breakdown of the relationship and, alimony claims, if any, would be subject to the nature of such act.

http://www.indiatimes.com/news/indi...lationships-that-it-made-us-proud-231832.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...-Supreme-Court-rules/articleshow/46901198.cms

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Children-born-of-live-in-relationships-are-legitimate-Supreme-Court-says/articleshow/34126867.cms
 
Last edited:

vgane

Well-known member
In case the couple have no progeny and there are no other liabilities, the woman is not entitled to alimony in case of adulterous relationship from a moral standpoint...We do not have retrograde lawas against women as In Islamic countries where women are stoned to death..I guess allowing woman to claim alimony after indulging in post divorce adultery would be a double whammy for her ex husband...He will always feel cheated when giving alimony..This anger may result in other crimes in society..
 

yesmohan

Well-known member
Alimony is for the maintenance expenses of " ex-wife". If the lady is "maintained" by some other person, the question of payment of alimony is not only debatable and makes mockery of the situation.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoy an ad-free experience along with numerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks