Nov 25
waseem Ahmad Lone asked:
The differences between the husband and the wife in a marital life is something to which no couple could be an exception. However the dispute becomes grave when one partner decides to seek the counsel of a Lawyer to avail the legal remedies. Naturally the other partner also joins the chorus by seeking his share of legal remedies. A simple dispute that could be settled by admitting a mistake now blows beyond the limits of possibility of mutual patch up. When a lawyer hears to the woeful tail of one partner or the other, the straitjacket procedures of law begin to override the delicate and emotional cord of love and affection that holds a couple together. Invariably a wife is advised to file a suit for maintenance and a suit for custody of the child whereas the husband is asked to divorce the wife so that she cannot claim maintenance.
It is said that when a lawyer represents a person before the Hon’ble Court he steps into the shoes of that person meaning thereby that his perception of the problem is taken to be the perception of his client. The Lawyer would perceive a marital dispute like any other dispute. He is trained to advise his client about the methods of exploiting the existing law to his best advantage and to the detriment of the other party. The social, psychological and emotional aspects of the problem have no bearing on his handling of the case unless of course if he is personally having such orientation of mind as to take into account such aspects of a problem.
As such a question arises that is a lawyer a person competent to handle the dispute arising between of a husband and wife? Does it not require a delicate touch to heal the wounds of shattered partners when the dispute takes the centre stage in their marital life? Probably every social scientist would agree with me if I say that a lawyer is not competent to handle such a situation. It would be correct even to say that even our courts are not equipped to address the delicate and emotional issues of marital life.
Our law has been framed based on the premise that women in our society are weak and infirm. Criminal Procedure Code provides that a women is entitled to maintenance from her husband if he neglects her. she can enforce the same through the court of law. She may also claim maintenance for her children. A lawyer advises her to file maintenance suit on her behalf and on behalf of their children. As a measure of interim relief the wife is granted an interim maintenance say of rupees one thousand or two thousand. Now, since the husband has to pay an assured sum as ordered by the court to his wife against his will, the differences becomes more sharp leading to a point of no return.
A question that arises, “Is a maintenance awarded because the husband refuses to maintain her?” As I perceive the dispute arises on something else may be mother in law and wife is not getting along well or the wife insists to have a separate home for herself or else the couple is not getting along well etc. etc. So the dispute is not that husband refuses to maintain his wife. The dispute is that relationship is not working on the expected lines for both the husband and wife. The maintenance that is supposed to protect a woman from being neglected is not used for its intended purpose but instead becomes a weapon of fight and intimidation in the hands of a wife.
The law as it is and the procedures that we adopt do not help the disputing couple as it ought to. The wife is perennially left to sustain on the meager sum awarded as maintenance. The Children of such a couple become victims of the dispute between parents. The husband is in perennial mess as he has to maintain the wife who refuses to live with him and who inculcates hatred in his children against him as a matter of revenge. The prolonged litigation adds to the woes of such husband, wife and children. The couple spends their prime time of youth in fighting the legal battle. In the process they loose sight of the old age ahead and when it approaches they realize that they have lost everything to the marital dispute.
To conclude my discussion I think a serious thought needs to be given to the whole process of marital disputes and the laws prevailing in this field. A marital dispute is a social and emotional issue and so the laws and the framework of the redress ought to be alive to such dimensions so that a better mechanism for handling such disputes can be evolved. The solution perhaps lies in setting up of separate family courts. The law as it is needs to looked at afresh to create a mechanism for counseling to such couples as a measure of pre-litigation process so that the consequences that such a dispute has for the husband, wife and the children could be avoided.
Albert Mullen
The differences between the husband and the wife in a marital life is something to which no couple could be an exception. However the dispute becomes grave when one partner decides to seek the counsel of a Lawyer to avail the legal remedies. Naturally the other partner also joins the chorus by seeking his share of legal remedies. A simple dispute that could be settled by admitting a mistake now blows beyond the limits of possibility of mutual patch up. When a lawyer hears to the woeful tail of one partner or the other, the straitjacket procedures of law begin to override the delicate and emotional cord of love and affection that holds a couple together. Invariably a wife is advised to file a suit for maintenance and a suit for custody of the child whereas the husband is asked to divorce the wife so that she cannot claim maintenance.
It is said that when a lawyer represents a person before the Hon’ble Court he steps into the shoes of that person meaning thereby that his perception of the problem is taken to be the perception of his client. The Lawyer would perceive a marital dispute like any other dispute. He is trained to advise his client about the methods of exploiting the existing law to his best advantage and to the detriment of the other party. The social, psychological and emotional aspects of the problem have no bearing on his handling of the case unless of course if he is personally having such orientation of mind as to take into account such aspects of a problem.
As such a question arises that is a lawyer a person competent to handle the dispute arising between of a husband and wife? Does it not require a delicate touch to heal the wounds of shattered partners when the dispute takes the centre stage in their marital life? Probably every social scientist would agree with me if I say that a lawyer is not competent to handle such a situation. It would be correct even to say that even our courts are not equipped to address the delicate and emotional issues of marital life.
Our law has been framed based on the premise that women in our society are weak and infirm. Criminal Procedure Code provides that a women is entitled to maintenance from her husband if he neglects her. she can enforce the same through the court of law. She may also claim maintenance for her children. A lawyer advises her to file maintenance suit on her behalf and on behalf of their children. As a measure of interim relief the wife is granted an interim maintenance say of rupees one thousand or two thousand. Now, since the husband has to pay an assured sum as ordered by the court to his wife against his will, the differences becomes more sharp leading to a point of no return.
A question that arises, “Is a maintenance awarded because the husband refuses to maintain her?” As I perceive the dispute arises on something else may be mother in law and wife is not getting along well or the wife insists to have a separate home for herself or else the couple is not getting along well etc. etc. So the dispute is not that husband refuses to maintain his wife. The dispute is that relationship is not working on the expected lines for both the husband and wife. The maintenance that is supposed to protect a woman from being neglected is not used for its intended purpose but instead becomes a weapon of fight and intimidation in the hands of a wife.
The law as it is and the procedures that we adopt do not help the disputing couple as it ought to. The wife is perennially left to sustain on the meager sum awarded as maintenance. The Children of such a couple become victims of the dispute between parents. The husband is in perennial mess as he has to maintain the wife who refuses to live with him and who inculcates hatred in his children against him as a matter of revenge. The prolonged litigation adds to the woes of such husband, wife and children. The couple spends their prime time of youth in fighting the legal battle. In the process they loose sight of the old age ahead and when it approaches they realize that they have lost everything to the marital dispute.
To conclude my discussion I think a serious thought needs to be given to the whole process of marital disputes and the laws prevailing in this field. A marital dispute is a social and emotional issue and so the laws and the framework of the redress ought to be alive to such dimensions so that a better mechanism for handling such disputes can be evolved. The solution perhaps lies in setting up of separate family courts. The law as it is needs to looked at afresh to create a mechanism for counseling to such couples as a measure of pre-litigation process so that the consequences that such a dispute has for the husband, wife and the children could be avoided.
Albert Mullen