What's Hot?
By Umesh R Yadav / ENS - BANGALORE
10th August 2012 08:24 AM
Legal points may not always save the day for advocates, especially when they are appearing for clients seeking divorce in front of considerate judges.
Advocate Deepa learnt this fact in the High Court on Thursday, when she appeared for Chitra, who sought divorce from her husband Vijay Kumar. Kumar and Chitra, a techie couple, have a daughter who studies in Class II. However, they quarrel over petty issues.
During the hearing, Justice K Bhakthavatsala told Deepa: “Since you are not married, you won’t understand the nuances of a relationship. Such cases should be handled by senior advocates who are married. They understand how much happiness is involved in being together.”
He said fights over trivial issues are common among couples. “Please don’t use such cases for your personal gain... Try to patch up the couple and ask them to live happily by forgetting mistakes. By doing so, you will get married to a good man soon,” he added.
Justice Bhakthavatsala told the couple: “Many problems can be solved at a personal level. This (seeking divorce) can happen in the West, but don’t make India one among them (Western countries).” Kumar said he was ready to live with Chitra, but her parents were asking him to leave his parents.
The judge asked Kumar’s counsel M T Nanaiah to take them to a hotel and try for reconciliation. Though they agreed for a settlement, Chitra put several conditions to live with her husband.
On learning that Chitra has spent most of her time abroad, the judge told her that marriage had a different meaning in India.
He asked them to bring their daughter for the next hearing, and adjourned the case till Tuesday.
Copyright © 2012 The New Indian Express. All rights reserved.
Comments(9)
What a decision Judge has taken. I personally appreciate the decision of judge. India is not the country where marriage and divorce to be happen quickly. This is country of love and be together. Western countries has many divorce cases to be pending, but don't make India to be one of them. Here marriage made to live together, not to separate a happy couple. I like the decision of Judge....This is a lesson for young generation...Please learn from it. Don't make your life miserable...!!!
Posted by Mehul at 08/10/2012 12:20 Reply to this Report abuse
It is certainly an observation with a difference.
Posted by Subbaram Danda at 08/10/2012 17:44 Reply to this Report abuse
women are not as innocent as they make it appear or claim to be. Man is always guilty until proven otherwise in marital conflicts is a wrong notion. Most women have dreams about married life, when they see how different the reality is, they dont know how to cope. They point out how the man keeps home untidy or watches TV a lot or similar silly things. The men take thses silly accusations seriously and want it out. The judge is right, the couple must identify the real reasons underlying the shism than separating with meaningless rhetoric as the only reason
Posted by soumya at 08/10/2012 23:28 Reply to this Report abuse
A judge’s job is to give judgement. Giving advice, however good-intentioned, is not his domain. Couples in matrimonial disharmony have other people to seek advice from – friends and relatives, who are more competent than a judge, and in whom the couples could more willingly and freely confide. Usually, couples try out these avenues before they decide to separate. Even if they have not tried out these measures or not tried them out to a degree considered sufficient by a judge, I feel it is not the court's job to give advice. It is for the couples to decide whether they would be happier being together or parting company. Once they approach the court for divorce, the judge has only to give his decision based on law. Secondly, it is for the litigants to decide whether to approach a married or an unmarried counsel, and for the advocate to decide whether to accept the case. May the judges do their job and just their job.
Posted by N. Moorthy at 08/11/2012 10:13 Reply to this Report abuse
Generally a suit is filed for divorce by one of the spouses beyond the intervention of " friends and relatives ". As such the honourable judge's reluctance to dissolve the marriage at once is to be appreciated. Here the case is between Kumar and Chitra. The crux of their problem seems to be parents of kumar. Why not parents of Chitra also be culpable ? Even before her marriage, Chitra knows Kumar's parents are entiled to live with him as per Indian tradition. What is the point in objecting to live with them after the marriage ? Kumar might have been brought up by his parents only as their shadow with their characteristic traits and values. But then it is amusing to note that Chitra finds Kumar acceptable but not their parents. In their old age on whom Kumar's parents depend for their creature comforts ? If education fails to inculcate a minimum charitable nature, then it is not education but an expedience to MAKE A LIVING without moral principles. Pity that human beings are not humane
Posted by G.Rajaram. at 08/11/2012 13:06 Reply to this Report abuse