Friday, May 17, 2002
Friday, May 17, 2002 |
| Southern States | ||
|
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
Advts: Classifieds | Employment | Obituary | Southern States
-
Tamil Nadu
By A. Subramani
The court now insists on the petitioners enclosing a wedding-eve photograph, in proof of the marriage, at the filing stage itself. If no photo is attached, the petitions will immediately be returned as unacceptable. Many family court advocates point out that in most cases matrimony ends all of a sudden, leaving little time for the divorce-seekers to collect photo evidence. In mutual divorce, this requirement does not pose any problem. However, if one of the spouses (read husband) denies access to photos and video cassettes to the other, the affected party will have little recourse left. In one case, a harassed housewife could not get hold of even a single wedding invitation— leave alone photographs or video cassette— though hundreds of cards had been distributed to relatives and friends at the time of her marriage eight years ago. ``If this is the ground reality, where is the question of wedding photographs being enclosed with the divorce petitions'' asks Daniel Mary, a lawyer in the family court circuit. Several poor litigants from rural areas do not take wedding photographs/videograph at all. However, advocate Rathna Sarah explains that in a case of impersonation a man brought a woman, claiming that she was his wife, and obtained divorce too. All this without the knowledge of his real wife. The new court procedure was given effect to only after this incident had come to light, she added. It was proof of not only the marriage but also the identity of the persons concerned. Another relatively recent phenomenon, which has delayed many a settlement, is the court insistence on the divorce-seekers revealing the quantum of fixed deposit to be made in the name of the children by either of the parents, separately or jointly. If, for some reasons, the parents or relatives are unable to mention the sum, the mutual petition will not be taken up for trial. However, ``the intention of the move is certainly laudable since it has the long-term interests of the wards at its core,'' says Ms. Daniel Mary. The court feels that there must be some financial security for children, notes Ms. Sarah. But intentional hesitation to deposit the sum in some cases apart, even many better-off spouses are caught unawares when it comes to mobilising a substantial amount. Opinions may vary on these factors, but one issue, which has the consensual support of every family court lawyer, is the need to ending the casual manner in which cases are taken up for trial. Once the `calling' is over in the morning, neither the clients nor their advocates know when the cases will be taken up. In the absence of a cause list, as being maintained in the High Court and City Civil Courts, they will have to wait almost endlessly for their turn. The procedure should be little more organised. If the parties are told when their cases will be taken up, they can retire to more comfortable environs and thereby also ease congestion in courtrooms, says Ms. Daniel Mary. The court insistence on the advocates filing a separate petition if they seek to assist the parties is also being resented by many advocates. This, again, is a rule of recent origin and even many family court lawyers are not aware of it.
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail
News:
Front Page |
National |
Southern States |
Other States |
International |
Opinion |
Business |
Sport |
Miscellaneous |
|
|
|
The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |
Copyright © 2002, The
Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of
this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of
The Hindu
|