No more Divorce - Mumbai family court

Think before filing Divorce Application

Living together after divorce is heard and seen of in Bollywood but it is not so the case in real life. At the same time before divorce, everyone has the right to take back the divorce application and the law appreciates this step too.

Divorce is no good to anyone. People think that by divorce they get to win but it is not so the case. Many marriages in which there are problems do the individual problems finish after the divorce.

Mumbai family court is known for its positive attitude and a new concept regarding joining the couple back and not emphasizing on break up or divorce. A family court in Bandra converted the atmosphere of court from negative to positive and like a form of event or gathering and thus the couples feels positive about their relations again. Around 100 couples changed their mind here and saved their marriages.

In the case of Suchita, the couple decided to get divorce after 8 years of marriage and a child. The main problem being that the husband wanted to live his life on the ancestral property only and did not want to work. Therefore, the wife had to ask money for everything from his parents. This created rifts in between them. In the end, being a professional commercial artist the wife started her own studio in her in laws house only and soon she succeeded in her work and started earning her livelihood well and thus saved her marriage with her decision of staying back and working from her husband’s ancestral home. 

In another case, a diamond merchant had decided to divorce his wife who was middle school pass. Then the wife relocated from Gujarat to Mumbai opened her own Tiffin center and challenged the divorce petition. After three years of long process of court when their divorce papers were finalized they both decided to meet each other without distraction before signing the papers for 2 days and in those two days both of them recoincilated and took away their divorce petition And save their marriage. 

A wrong notion in the society is that once a divorce petition has been entered in the court it cannot be taken back which is very wrong. The prosecutors and lawyers etc should be the ones to make people more aware bout their rights. 

The petition to take back the divorce petition can be submitted to the family court. Once it reaches the councilor then both parties have to make it evident before the councilor that they both are ok with taking away the divorce petition and this is done to safeguard both of them and to see if anyone is doing this under pressure. Then this petition is sent to the judge and he/she gives the decision in one day or decree. Everyone including the judge and councilor are always in favor of making people realize as to not break their marriage in India.

Employee Retention Policies and Strategies

Employee Retention Policies and Strategies Tips

Earning rights are part of living rights

Under sec 25 F of Industrial dispute act 1947, some important decisions have been taken. 

Management has been asked to take the workers back on work with full settlement of unemployment salary. Judge V Gopalagora gave the decision in a case of up state and charansingh that constitutional rights 19 and 21 have not been complied as they clearly state the freedom right of earning and living. The family members are suffering as the earning capacity has been taken away from the worker. In another case of Olga Talis and Mumbai Municipal Corporation the judge quoted that is the right to earn a part of right to live and the answer is yes. 

Sec 21 of constitution is very wide in its thought process. The right to live is not only limited to death penalty it is associated with right to earn also as no one can live without ability and capacity to earn livelihood. Therefore, if a person is devoid of its capacity to earn livelihood then it is a direct impact on its right to live. This is inhuman and is major cause of village population to migrate to cities. 

In another similar case the fact were as follows. Charan Singh was appointed as tube well operator in fisheries department on 6 march 1974. He was fired on 22 august 1975 by quoting the reason that since he was kept temporarily now there is no use of him further. Charan Singh took the matter forward to court. 

The court asked the management to appoint the person back on 24 Feb. 1997 but he was not given any backlog of salary of past. He was given the fisherman’s post quoting that its equivalent to tube well operator but he had not come to work for that job. The management applied to high court at Allahabad that no salary will be given from 24 Feb. 1997 to 31 Jan 2005. However, the court quoted and gave verdict against the management saying that they wasted so many years of the worker and he should be given his rightly due in four weeks. Supreme Court also voted for with this verdict of Allahabad high court and agreed to the righteous salary from 24 Feb. 1997 to 31 Jan 2005.

Earning rights are part of living rights