Saturday, December 15, 2012

டேய் நீ ஆம்புளையா, கல்யாணம் ஆயிடிச்சா, அப்ப காலமெல்லாம் காசு குடுடா, போடா, டைவர்ஸ் ஆனாலும் காசு குடுடா

கதைச்சுருக்கம் :

  • விவாகரத்து பெற்ற நேரத்தில் குழந்தைக்கும் ஜீவனாம்சம் வேண்டாம் என்று சொன்ன மனைவி, பல வருஷங்கள் கழித்து வந்து குழந்தைக்காக பணம் கேட்கிறாள் !!! [மேஜர் ஆன குழந்தை வந்து பணம் கேட்கிறது !!!] 
  • இதில் என்னடாவென்றால் மனைவியின் சம்பளம் கணவன் சம்பளைத்தைப்போல இரண்டு மடங்குக்கும் மேல்
  • கணவன் ஒரு பஸ் ஓட்டுனர். மாதம் ரூ 14000 சம்பாதிக்கிறார். விவாகரத்தான பின் அடுத்த திருமணம் செய்துகொண்டுள்ளார்...அவருக்கு அந்த (தன்) குடும்பத்தை காக்கவேண்டிய பொருப்பு இருக்கிறது
  • இந்த கேஸில், மாஜி மனைவி நர்ஸ். மாசம் ரூ 31000 சம்பாதிக்கிரார் !!! அவருக்கு இந்த குழந்தை தவிர வேறு யாருமில்லை
  • விவாகரத்தான நேரத்தில் தனக்கோ (மாஜி மனைவிக்கோ) குழந்தைக்கோ ஜீவனாம்ஸம் வேண்டாம் என்று கோர்ட்டு முன் சொல்லி இருக்கிறாள் மாஜி மனைவி !!! இருப்பினும் இப்போது வாக்கு பிழன்று ஜீவனாம்ஸம் கேட்க, கோர்ட்டும் ஆமாம் என்கிறது !!!!!!
  • ஆக மொத்தம், ஒரு ஆண் திருமணம் செய்துகொண்டால், காலமெல்லாம் கப்பம் கட்ட வேண்டிய ஆபத்தான் நிலை இந்தியாவில் உருவாகிவிட்டிருக்கிறது 

==============ஆண்களின் அவலமான நிலை ==============

: Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:36 ISTThe Indian Express

Court to see if mother can forfeit minor's right to maintenance from father

Agencies : New Delhi, Fri Dec 14 2012, 17:49 hrs

A magisterial court has been asked by a sessions court to examine afresh if a girl can seek maintenance from her father after his divorce from her mother with the condition that she would not claim any sustenance from him in future.
Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) Kaveri Baweja gave the order on an appeal by the man against the magisterial court's order to him to pay Rs 2,000 a month to his physically challenged daughter from his first marriage.
The man had challenged the magistrate's order claiming that at the time of divorce, he had an agreement with his former wife that she would not claim any maintenance from him, either for herself or for her daughter.
Refusing to pay the maintenance, the man said he was a DTC bus driver earning Rs 14,000 per month and he has to support his second wife and children.
He added the girl's mother was a nurse in a government hospital here and was earning over Rs 31,000 per month and she has no other responsibility except to maintain the girl.
The ASJ, however, said till the matter is heard afresh by the trial court and the orders are passed again on the interim maintenance, the man should continue paying Rs 2,000 per month to the girl.
"The question as to whether the respondent (girl) could have exercised her independent right in claiming maintenance from her father upon attaining the age of majority is a question, which has been left open and undecided in the impugned order (of trial court)," the sessions court said.
The ASJ added, "Thus, having regard to the aforesaid, I find that since this question goes to the very root of the matter and directly affects the very maintainability of the petition, I deem it appropriate to direct the trial court to rehear the parties on the application of grant of interim maintenance and to decide the issue of maintenance in the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances."
The girl, a major now, had approached the trial court claiming maintenance from her father on the ground that she was 60 percent physically disabled and till date her mother had solely borne the expenses of her studies and treatment.
Filing the petition under section 125 of the CrPC, the girl said the man, being her father, was equally responsible for maintaining her.
The sessions court after hearing the arguments said the trial court had expressed its opinion with regard to the liability of the man to maintain his daughter from his first marriage and it had also taken note of the fact that both the parents of the girl are under obligation to contribute towards her maintenance.
"However, the trial court's order is totally silent with regard to the contention of the man that the girl could not have claimed any maintenance from him pursuant to the settlement arrived at between him and her mother, at the time of divorce, wherein her mother had agreed not to claim the maintenance either for herself or for her daughter.
"The question as to whether the girl could, after the said settlement, reopen the issue of claiming maintenance from the man has not been addressed by the trial court in its order, though this argument was raised before it by the man," the ASJ said.