Mr. Rebates

Friday, February 19, 2010

Visitation Granted.

18 February 2010

Trip to India this time was fruitful.

As I asked Visitation Rights with Bangalore High court I got the order to meet my son.

Actually I wanted to Prove something else than meeting him.

I wanted to show my Ex Out Law that, I am still around and can come any time claiming my rights on my son.

Their Lawyer resisted saying I did not met him for years, nor came to ask his visitation for years as of now I am married… bla bla…

Still Judge agree to give me visitation on Price…. by depositing my Passport at Local court. that was my Outlaws condition as they said I may run away with my son as I am working in Kuwait.

so they have that fear I may do such things….

Getting order was small steps towards my ultimate GOAL. Even after getting Order I did not go to Visit him. I just wanted to show them and make them wait.

It is unfortunate situation of India that Father of child give surety to meet his Son. same if a women kidnap and keep child with her, and Father ask the same Court will grant same ORDER….?


That’s the Biased Indian courts do.

She took away my son by force, and kept like orphan with others when she Enjoy in Dubai. I should ask the Law to give guarantee of my son, as they asked me.

Coz I have equal rights over him and I care for his Safety too

HC: Divorced woman can’t use ex’s name

Swati Deshpande TNN

Mumbai: What’s in a name? The famous Shakespearan line popped up during an acrimonious court proceeding on Wednesday. “A lot,’’ said an aggrieved man, especially when my ex-wife is misusing it. The Bombay High Court agreed and passed a rare order that might make divorced men smile. The court directed a divorced woman to stop using her former husband’s name and surname.

The HC also clarified that the “ex-wife cannot use the husband’s name anywhere, including in her bank account’’.

The landmark judgment was passed by Justice Roshan Dalvi as she dismissed a petition filed by a woman challenging an interim order of the family court in Bandra.

R R Vachha, principal judge of the family court in Mumbai, had last September restrained the woman from using her exhusband’s name and surname as their marriage had ended four years ago. “By using the ex-husband’s name or surname, there is always a possibility of people being misled that she is still the wife, when in fact she is not,’’ said Vachha. The HC upheld the family court order and said it need not be interfered with but should be given effect to “for all purposes’’.

Divorced woman can’t use ex’s surname too

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has directed a divorced woman to stop using her former husband’s name and surname. The HC also clarified that the “exwife cannot use the husband’s name anywhere, including in her bank account’’.

The battle over names between the couple arose a year after the family court in February 2006 granted them divorce and the HC finalised it the same year. But the wife says she has moved the Supreme Court where the matter is pending; she claimed she was still his wife.

The couple had begun their divorce fight in 1996 after staying together for a little over six months. When after their divorce, the woman filed for more maintenance, the husband—a 49-year-old police inspector—contended through his lawyers that his ex-wife continued to use his name even though she was no longer legally his wife and sought that she be restrained from doing so. The man alleged that she was

“mischievously posing as his wife, entering into altercations and caused embarrassing situations for him’’. He produced a news report from a local paper in his native village in Maharashtra about one such act of hers and said in villages where people were known by their family names, such behaviour affected not only him but also his entire family.

The Lalwanis also argued that since the woman was not a wife anymore, she was not entitled to tag on her ex-husband’s name and surname to her own as it would be misleading. The wife argued that her ex was merely being “malicious and trying to malign’’ her. The family court held that “the marriage had come to an end by virtue of the orders of two courts, but still the woman claimed to be the wife’’. Observing that the issue arose out of a marital relationship, it restrained her from using the ex-husband’s name.

Wednesday, February 17, 2010

No extradition of NRIs in kidnap cases

Dhananjay Mahapatra, TNN, Aug 9, 2009, 12.54am IST
NEW DELHI: One has heard this too often. An NRI father or mother accusing the other partner of kidnapping their children back to India in breach of a foreign decree and cocking a snook around the consequent Red Corner Notice issued by Interpol.

Is not the CBI, the Interpol partner in India, obliged to act upon such a Red Corner Notice (RCN), arrest the offending parent and extradite him/her to the foreign country to face trial there?

No, says the Supreme Court which would appear as a virtual thumbs up for the parent who slips out of the foreign country with the child and lands in familiar shores where the litigation takes years before being finally adjudicated.

Reversing the Bombay High Court's arrest order on the basis of an Interpol RCN issued against one B J Lakhani who allegedly came to India from US with his daughter despite a restrain order from a Clayton County Magistrate Court in Georgia, a Bench comprising Justices S B Sinha and M K Sharma on Friday said an Interpol RCN could not be a ground for arrest.

In the absence of an extradition request from the US or a foreign country, there could be no arrest merely on the basis of an Interpol RCN, the Bench said accepting a clear stand from the ministry of external affairs (MEA).

The chances of extradition of the kidnapping parent is slimmer even when the foreign country places such a request as the SC recorded the MEA's stand that "kidnapping in case of matrimonial dispute per se is not considered to be an extraditable offence". Thus, the aggrieved parent has to come to India to pursue her remedies before the judiciary.

Coming to Lakhani's rescue, MEA said, "Even violation of an order passed by the court of competent jurisdiction in US being punishable for six months only, Lakhani could not be extradited for commission of the said offence."

MEA said that on receipt of an RCN, it was not the practice to arrest the person immediately but only to trace him. "The consideration of the question of arrest and extradition would be within the framework of domestic law including the Indian Extradition Act and the Extradition Treaty with the requesting country," it said.

Lakhani had married H Thakker on April 6, 2002 at Mumbai. After marriage, they moved to California where their daughter was born in April 2003. Alleging matrimonial harassment, Thakker moved courts in USA and sought divorce. During the pendency of the proceedings, the family court at Massachusetts passed an order of temporary custody of the child, restrain and abuse prevention order in her favour.

In April 2006, Lakhani allegedly forged Thakker's consent to take the daughter back to India. After he left, she complained to the police alleging abduction and an arrest warrant was issued. The trial court also passed a decree of divorce and custody of the child in her favour in May 2006.

She also moved a family court in Mumbai in May 2007, which allowed her custody of the child. Lakhani appealed in the HC which stayed the trial court order.

Meanwhile, the Atlanta city police and American court issued warrant of arrest against Lakhani, which was transmitted through Interpol to the Indian government. Lakhani moved the Bombay HC challenging the legality of the arrest warrant and sought stay of the RCN. The HC refused to tinker with the RCN. Lakhani then appealed against the HC order in SC.

After deciding that the RCN could not be a ground for Lakhani's arrest, the SC left the adjudication of the dispute between the husband and wife over the custody of their daughter to the Bombay HC, where the appeal is pending.

Sunday, February 14, 2010

HC judge lashes out against 'culture of adjournments'

TNN, 29 January 2010, 01:59am IST

NEW DELHI: A Delhi high court judge has blamed his colleagues for the "culture of adjournment'' that often prolongs cases for years.

Rueing the "lattitude shown by the high court'' to lawyers who plead for adjournments, justice S N Dhingra said: "It appears as if there is an understanding between the courts and advocates that come what may the orders of trial courts refusing adjournments shall be set aside on mercy pleas and one more opportunity shall be granted.''

Claiming that courts often grant adjournments on "frivolous grounds'', Dhingra said: "A separate breed of advocates has cropped up who are experts in pleading for adjournments and dragging cases. This culture has to be brought to an end,'' the HC noted, while upholding a order passed by a guardianship court in a child custody dispute between a couple. The court refused to adjourn the case when the woman's lawyer claimed that he had left the case files in his car which was stolen 11 days ago.

The HC agreed with the decision of the lower court to proceed with the hearing and close cross examination of witnesses, despite protests by the advocate of the child's mother. "Adjournments are sought in the name of strikes, elections, personal difficulties of the senior or briefing counsels or because two counsels agree to an adjournment... This wholeculture of adjournment is a major reasons why a case or a petition, which should be decided in two or three hearings, is disposed of in more than 100 hearings,'' the HC noted while dismissing the appeal filed by the child's motheragainst the lower court's order.

Dhingra said since the child was currently with the mother, she was making all attempts to prolong the hearings into the custody dispute.

Domestic Violence

Domestic violence term itself conveys its meaning well. But, hold on, here it has a different meaning. If you are wondering what different meaning can it convey, you need to be aware of the laws related to Domestic Violence in India and should know about the cases in depth.

A shocking face of Domestic Violence is observed in India, since these laws came into being. There are a variety of cases of women ranging from the age of 20 – 60 and even more alleging that they have suffered domestic violence. Some of them have stayed with the accused for 20 years while some haven’t stayed with them for a day !!! YES, this is not a typing mistake, I mean it when I say that some of them haven’t stayed with the accused for a single day, at least this is claimed by the accused who are facing trial of such cases for years and giving this women a hefty amount of money as an Interim Relief in the alleged Domestic Violence case.

Many of us would wonder …. are the accused saying the truth ? … Well, that is something which needs to be proved at the “Evidence Stage”. But when ? Till then they would have lost some very precious years of their lives and also would have payed the woman a very heavy amount as DV relief. Now, if they are ever proved to be innocent, there is nobody who ever cares of returning them their life, their money and mental peace.

The woman who puts allegations on them is able to successfully subject them to years of financial, mental and physical torture. All that she needs to do is, give a statement of all her whims and fantasies. A mere statement with no evidence to prove that she was staying with the accused is enough to ruin the lives of the accused and to cause them a trauma which has no respite.

Yes, I know, some of you will contend that for how long can she sustain this case, which to the eye witnesses and even to a logical mind appears to be false ? There lies the crux of the matter. She can actually avoid evidence and keep pulling the matter till she has EARNED enough from her victims. In some cases, the victims become so helpless that they end up paying her a heavy amount of money and go for an “Out of Court” settlement. So, in either of the cases, she gains what she wanted from this brutal and insane game that she has played against so many innocent people.

No wonder these so called “Domestic Violence” cases are on a rise specially after the enactment of the law which claims to be a hope for the “Domestic Violence victim women” . So, now it does compel us to think … What is Domestic Violence? Has it got anything to do with the accused being in domestic relationship with the accuser or even being present near her to be able to cause violence ?

That answers my question …. Domestic Violence of an innocent family can start on the day they get one of their sons married and they let an inhuman extortionist in. While they suffer this violence, the abuser gets relief and “protection” to be able to harass them more. And this violence against these innocent men and women is unfortunately not covered under any law !

An idea to empower greedy wives

“Domestic Violence” should necessarily mean some kind of physical or mental violence. But in a move to empower the women who claim themselves as victims, interim reliefs are sometimes ordered in favour of women who have evidently not gone through any kind of violence. Cases last for years and till then the accuser manages to accumulate some good amount of money which helps her fund her false litigation as well as makes the whole effort of putting a false case worthwhile. Isn’t this a wonderful way of propagating this law and then claim that “we have been able to grant relief to xy,000 women under this act and this proves the success of its implementation”.

This makes us think that ultimately the crime has not been committed by the accused in these particular cases when the accuser hasn’t even stayed with them, then how do we justify the act of giving her reliefs? We will have to stop these reliefs ultimately else the accused can always challenge the order. So, something needs to be done to keep it going and to make sure that this act creates thousands and infact crores of Victims who are labeled as “accused” and who are funding these wives for their empowerment ?

Well, here I have an idea for the empowerment of wives. Let us also cover the wife’s “dreams” also in the jurisdiction of the act. So, whichever DV allegation appears to be false and the case is weak on merits can always take benefit of this new clause which can be used to empower the so called “victim wife”. Then she can always say that she was tortured and beaten up, not given food and clothing, etc in her dreams…. (list cannot be exhaustive as it varies with how imaginative the wife can be). The best part is that the accused will never be able to collect any evidence against those alleged offenses as they are not allowed to visit or photograph the wife’s dream. Also, there can be no medical test for establishing the claims as false. This will enable the authorities to grant even more reliefs and empower more wives, thereby proving the success of the newly blossoming law.

Reservation for Women !

Now there is another uproar about “Reservation for women” by the authorities who believe they have the right to decide the fate of any citizen. Let me ask them this simple question: Why are these people concerned with every woman except those who have male relatives and are falsely implicated in serious cases ? These women are not left with any money to support the system and have no one to support them. They are not treated as women at all while framing serious charges against them. These women are left alone to feed themselves, support themselves physically and emotionally and help their families cope against the traumatic situations associated with false cases. They are not considered eligible for any maintenance but are instead considered the most deserving candidates for harassment through the system, cops and even law authorities.
While laws are amended for a special section of women called “wives”, the mothers and sisters are hardly given any rights as human beings. If they believe they are at influential positions which make them eligible to bring about radical changes in laws which can have a very widespread impact, they should do something for the rights, growth and development of those thousands of women in this country who are arrested just on the basis of some false statements given by some unscrupulous wives.

I, as an Indian woman, proudly claim that I do not want any reservation. I wasn’t discriminated against by my parents and was sent to the same school as my brother. I have similar genes and brain as my brother. I work hard like him and have established myself solely on my capabilities. I am a tax payer and a responsible citizen of this country, so I deserve to be consulted in matters deciding the fate of this democratic country.

All that I want is peace and the right to live. I want to be free from false cases and false allegations. I want to first at least be treated equal to any other Indian Citizen. No, I don’t want reservation, I want to be treated like a human more than a woman.

What the ACCUSED have to go through

People who are trapped into such cases, such as, 498a and DV act,  have to suffer many hardships and harassment from influential people who get the authority to do anything immoral, unethical and even illegal against the innocent family … Following is just a summary of what some of them have faced …
1. Extortion in the name of out of crt settlement

2. Extortion in the name of maintenance, streedhan recovery etc

3. Ordering of interim maintenance but refusal to accept the amount to be able to blame the hubby of non compliance

4. Ordering the hubby to submit his payslip when he has already mentioned that the harmful wife has approached his home and ex employer and harmed him/ his family

5. Without considering even Prima Facie presence of violence, granting relief to the woman who has trapped a complete family into false litigations. And relief amounting worth such a high amount which would be enough to sustain the woman and her complete family at the cost of the innocent hubby.

6. Subjecting the family of the hubby to physical and mental harassment that too in presence of plc.

7. Cases being prevented from going to evidence stage through illegal “further investigations” for around 2 years.

8. Many cases pending in different courts for a crime that was never committed !!!!

Innocent people are arrested for no fault of theirs. These so called fighters for Womens’ rights, can they imagine how it feels if their sisters and mothers are arrested without any reason and are produced in the court like criminals ? Is this an attempt to eradicate crime or rather one to produce more criminals from these oppressed beings who have to go through physical and mental harassment under the pretext of women empowerment ?

Divorcee claims maintenance, court raps her for contempt

New Delhi, Jan 25

The Delhi High Court Monday slapped a fine on a woman for contempt, taking serious note of the fact that she had concealed she was employed and continued to claim maintenance from her husband, and filed cases against him despite an undertaking to court.

Justice S.N. Dhingra slapped a fine of Rs.10,000 on Manjit Kaur for concealing the facts from the court and violating the undertaking she gave in another court in Jalandhar that following her divorce she will not file any case against her husband after settlement.

"Where a person after concealing the material facts about her own employment and about the undertaking given to the court, files an application for maintenance just to harass the opposite side (husband), this amounts to violation of undertaking given by her," the judge said.

The court was hearing her husband Gurbinder Singh who had filed a contempt case against his estranged wife for filing cases against him.

The court also took note of the fact that the woman was working as a teacher in a school in Jalandhar but did not disclose it before the court and claimed maintenance of Rs.3,000 per month.

Despite a final settlement between the two in 2000, the woman filed petitions against her husband and violated the undertaking that she will not harass him or his family members.

The court directed the woman to seek maintenance for herself after her retirement from her present job, and said, "Claim maintenance after disclosing pension and other income and properties to the court which she holds in Delhi or at other places."

Last updated on Jan 25th, 2010 at 20:20 pm IST

Short marriage, small alimony

January 19, 2010

A wife of two and a half months wanted her separated husband to bear the expenses of her higher education in the US. The Bombay high court said no.

The court refused to enhance the interim maintenance for the woman, a Pune-based dentist.

At the same time, the high court rejected the request of her husband to reduce the monthly maintenance amount of Rs12,000. The husband, who works for IBM, lives in Boston.

“The wife may not be entitled to claim interim maintenance based upon an arithmetical calculation alone,” justice Roshan Dalvi said.

Tina and Nitin (names changed) got married on May 5, 2007 and after staying together in Boston for two and a half months, Tina returned to her Pune home. Nitin contended that despite several attempts to call Tina back to Boston, she refused to return.

In August 2007, she came to India, as her grandmother was unwell, and stayed on even after the latter passed away. In September 2008, Nitin filed a divorce petition and the family court granted an interim maintenance of Rs12,000 to Tina as per the Hindu Marriage Act 1955.

Nitin stated that the maintenance amount was too high as he earned only Rs73,620 after tax deductions. His advocate Geeta Mulekar told the court that Tina had not stated that she was a dentist and had her own practice.

Tina has claimed the maintenance of Rs2.5 lakh a month. “Because of the attitude of the respondent [Nitin], she is being deprived of higher studies,” Mulekar said, adding that because of Nitin’s assurances she had enrolled in Simmons Woman College in Boston to pursue MBA.

The validity of the assurance will have to be examined by the trial court at the time of granting divorce, justice Roshan Dalvi said. The court will have to consider whether educational expenses can be covered under maintenance.

“Only the evidence would determine whether the wife would be entitled to pursue her studies in the US,” the judge said.

Refusing to enhance the maintenance amount, justice Dalvi observed: “She [Tina] would not be entitled to half or even almost half of the net salary of the husband because of her extremely short marriage.”