Raghav_12 Posted July 18, 2013 Posted July 18, 2013 Cabinet nod to women's share in husband's ancestral property http://www.indianexpress.com/news/cabinet-nod-to-womens-share-in-husbands-ancestral-property/1143266/ The Union Cabinet on Wednesday approved amendments to the marriage law to enable a married woman to get a share of her husband's ancestral property as compensation in case of a divorce. Accepting a slew of recommendations of a Group of Ministers (GoM) that was set up to debate the issue, the Cabinet cleared the Bill that is now expected to come up for passage in the Monsoon Session of Parliament next month. The GoM had been tasked to ensure that the marriage law was made more women-friendly and decide how sufficient compensation can be given to a woman from her husband's ancestral property in case of divorce on the ground of "irretrievable breakdown of marriage". The GoM was also asked to take a view on whether a judge can exercise discretion in granting divorce if one of the partners does not move a second "joint application" for divorce with mutual consent. In the event that ancestral property cannot be divided, the new bill says that the woman should get adequate compensation by calculating the husband's share. The GoM also discussed the issue of allowing courts to decide on doing away with the mandatory six-month waiting period for couples seeking divorce through a joint petition by mutual consent This bill would have very far-reaching consequences on India society.
Desi Cartman Posted July 18, 2013 Posted July 18, 2013 India needs to have central records and easy access by court to view what a person had in an account and his assets on a particular date. Even if they implement the above law, how will someone prove that a person inherited or has the property anyway ?
seedhi Posted July 18, 2013 Posted July 18, 2013 Cabinet nod to women's share in husband's ancestral property http://www.indianexpress.com/news/cabinet-nod-to-womens-share-in-husbands-ancestral-property/1143266/ This bill would have very far-reaching consequences on India society.This is only for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Jains and interfaith couples. Not for Muslim or Christian couples.
hhunaeh Posted July 18, 2013 Posted July 18, 2013 I don't understand why Indian feminists continue to encourage laws which make Indian women look helpless and in need of protection from men instead of treating them like independent individuals. Why can't they insist on implementation of women getting a share of father's property? It's like they want to uphold twisted traditions rather than uproot them.
The Outsider Posted July 18, 2013 Posted July 18, 2013 It's a great decision - ancestral property seldom goes to the daughters in India, so there is nothing wrong in them having a right on the husband's ancestral property.
Raghav_12 Posted July 19, 2013 Author Posted July 19, 2013 It's a great decision - ancestral property seldom goes to the daughters in India' date=' so there is nothing wrong in them having a right on the husband's ancestral property.[/quote'] It is absoultely absurd to give any share of the property to wife which she has nothing to do with. A mother or father works whole life to get a property for his or her son. Now some woman comes, stays for few months and walks away with part of the property. This is absolutely ridiculous and against the law of natural justice. I can understand if somebody says that wife has a right on the property which they have earned during subsistence of marriage or co-habitaion even if wife has not contributed monetorily. But wife having any share in the property which I myself earned before marriage or my mother/father earned may be even before my birth is clearly victimizing men completely. And more pertinine question is why wife's property (inherited or uninheriated) should not be shared? that's equality we talk about? Unfortunately, indian matrimonial laws which are hopelessly one-sided would get even further worse if this bill becomes a law in current shape.
The Outsider Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 It is absoultely absurd to give any share of the property to wife which she has nothing to do with. A mother or father works whole life to get a property for his or her son. Now some woman comes, stays for few months and walks away with part of the property. This is absolutely ridiculous and against the law of natural justice. I can understand if somebody says that wife has a right on the property which they have earned during subsistence of marriage or co-habitaion even if wife has not contributed monetorily. But wife having any share in the property which I myself earned before marriage or my mother/father earned may be even before my birth is clearly victimizing men completely. Your idealistic framing of the law is very different from real life. In reality, the vast majority of women in India do not get anything in inheritance. There was a law enacted around 20 years back which gave equal rights to sons and daughters on ancestral property which was not covered under a will. How has that progressed? Are women in villages or even cities receiving any of the ancestral property? The short answer is, no. In villages it is taken away by force and in cities, by the instrument of the will which leaves everything among the sons. So, what are women supposed to do in this situation. Let's say there is a girl who married against the wishes of her family to a person whose earning on paper is not great, but has a lot of ancestral property. What will she do after a divorce? And more pertinine question is why wife's property (inherited or uninheriated) should not be shared? that's equality we talk about? Unfortunately, indian matrimonial laws which are hopelessly one-sided would get even further worse if this bill becomes a law in current shape. I agree on that. If a wife has inherited property, then in the case of a divorce it should be split between husband and wife.
seedhi Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 Your idealistic framing of the law is very different from real life. In reality, the vast majority of women in India do not get anything in inheritance. There was a law enacted around 20 years back which gave equal rights to sons and daughters on ancestral property which was not covered under a will. How has that progressed? Are women in villages or even cities receiving any of the ancestral property? The short answer is, no. In villages it is taken away by force and in cities, by the instrument of the will which leaves everything among the sons. So, what are women supposed to do in this situation. Let's say there is a girl who married against the wishes of her family to a person whose earning on paper is not great, but has a lot of ancestral property. What will she do after a divorce? I agree on that. If a wife has inherited property, then in the case of a divorce it should be split between husband and wife. (i) The law introduces "no fault divorce". So even if the husband is not at fault the wife can ask for divorce. (ii) The husband has been stripped of any right to oppose the divorce. (not so the wife) (iii) Wife gets share in ancestral property upon divorce. ... a perfect recipe for abuse.
The Outsider Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 (i) The law introduces "no fault divorce". So even if the husband is not at fault the wife can ask for divorce. (ii) The husband has been stripped of any right to oppose the divorce. (not so the wife) I don't see anything wrong in a "no fault divorce", if you don't want to be married with someone anymore there should not be necessarily a "fault" for splitting. I agree it should be applied to both. (iii) Wife gets share in ancestral property upon divorce. ... a perfect recipe for abuse. Nothing wrong with that, as I've explained in my post above given the ground realities of the country. At the same time, the husband should also be entitled to the wife's ancestral property.
Precambrian Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 Why the hell not applicable for Muslims and christians?
seedhi Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 I don't see anything wrong in a "no fault divorce", if you don't want to be married with someone anymore there should not be necessarily a "fault" for splitting. I agree it should be applied to both. Nothing wrong with that, as I've explained in my post above given the ground realities of the country. At the same time, the husband should also be entitled to the wife's ancestral property.So a girl is married to a man, a couple of months later she wants out - even though the husband is not at fault. She files for IRBM (no fault) divorce, the husband has no right to oppose it. She gets a share of the ancestral property of the husband. A very nice extortion racket in the making.
Raghav_12 Posted July 19, 2013 Author Posted July 19, 2013 I don't see anything wrong in a "no fault divorce", if you don't want to be married with someone anymore there should not be necessarily a "fault" for splitting. I agree it should be applied to both. Nothing wrong with that, as I've explained in my post above given the ground realities of the country. At the same time, the husband should also be entitled to the wife's ancestral property. what you explained is absolutely illogical. Just because women are failing to get property share from their parents, you find it logical to give them recourse to the property of husbands which whom she wouldn't have spent a single week or month? What kind of logic is this? why you want to victimize husbands father, just because women own father/mother fail to give her property? If ensuring women get enough property in the country is such a big responsibility then why limit it to husband's mother/father, tax whole country so that women can be given some property? Ask money from the NRI's even more as they are the richest of the lot. And if your husband is not earning enough and you two didn't build enough property during subsistence of marriage, then live with it. No need to be greedy and eye property of husband's mother/father.
Raghav_12 Posted July 19, 2013 Author Posted July 19, 2013 So a girl is married to a man, a couple of months later she wants out - even though the husband is not at fault. She files for IRBM (no fault) divorce, the husband has no right to oppose it. She gets a share of the ancestral property of the husband. A very nice extortion racket in the making. Look at the situation. A woman marries somebody, crates ruckus in the house, have extramarital affairs and walks off the marriage. Instead of being supported in such cases, husband would have to part with his and his family's hard earned money. The example I am talking about would not be the case always, but there would be few cases certainly. It is absolutely unfair to ask husband to give his property to departing wife when he has all well-meaning intentions to continue the marriage. Another tool of extortion and another nail in the coffin on family system which is already crumbling.
The Outsider Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 Again, you guys are talking about extreme situations like being married for 1-2 weeks/months. Laws have to be formulated according to the general conditions in the society. I would be happy to concede my point if you can demonstrate that a significant number of marriages in India end up filing for divorce in that time frame. As for extreme examples - even I gave one, which was ignored. There is no point talking about extreme examples - lets talk about the general framework of the society.
The Outsider Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 And if your husband is not earning enough and you two didn't build enough property during subsistence of marriage, then live with it. No need to be greedy and eye property of husband's mother/father. Incorrect in the context of the example I gave. In my example, the husband was providing more than enough for the wife and kids, but was doing it on the basis of property and/or business not officially in his name.
The Outsider Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 So a girl is married to a man, a couple of months later she wants out - even though the husband is not at fault. She files for IRBM (no fault) divorce, the husband has no right to oppose it. She gets a share of the ancestral property of the husband. A very nice extortion racket in the making. I guess you missed the line where I said "no fault divorce" should be applicable to both, and so should inherited property rights.
Detonator Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 Well, it looks like a good move, but there is a high possibility that women will misuse. The Gold digger culture among women will come into India as well.
Tiger80 Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 what you explained is absolutely illogical. Just because women are failing to get property share from their parents, you find it logical to give them recourse to the property of husbands which whom she wouldn't have spent a single week or month? What kind of logic is this? why you want to victimize husbands father, just because women own father/mother fail to give her property? If ensuring women get enough property in the country is such a big responsibility then why limit it to husband's mother/father, tax whole country so that women can be given some property? Ask money from the NRI's even more as they are the richest of the lot. And if your husband is not earning enough and you two didn't build enough property during subsistence of marriage, then live with it. No need to be greedy and eye property of husband's mother/father. I think ancestral property is called which is coming from generations probably grand father and not which your father and mother earned.A father and mother are free divide or donate property. They can even disown one of their son.For example son has love marriage, parents disown him from their property few years later they have divorce, then how could son pay share of mother's /fathers property to wife when he himself is disowned
Tiger80 Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 It's a great decision - ancestral property seldom goes to the daughters in India' date=' so there is nothing wrong in them having a right on the husband's ancestral property.[/quote'] Yes now more and more families will search submissive shy girls for their sons , rather than career minded women.Dowry rates will shoot up for career women as there could be very few takers for them
Detonator Posted July 19, 2013 Posted July 19, 2013 Yes now more and more families will search submissive shy girls for their sons ' date=' rather than career minded women.Dowry rates will shoot up for career women as there could be very few takers for them[/quote'] +1 And then we will get to know abt guys who lost half their property to the divorced wife (who got into 2nd marriage). After few years, guys will get too afraid of getting married. India desperately want to become like US, so they are starting from here.
Recommended Posts