Citizens' Issues
When Divorce Doth Us Part… With the Cash
The miya-bibi takrar is a never ending serial, everywhere, all the time—from our plumber to Hollywood movie stars, from one-night stands to live-in relations, humble zoppadpattis to the palatial bungalows. But the bottom-line is invariably money.
 
The march to court is always on a carpet of indignation and acrimony. Roses that bloomed yesterday are shredded today, shorn of fragrance; exposed thorns growing deadlier by the day. It is always a pathetic sight.
 
Scene 1: Display of love for the child. Usually, only one child is involved, the sourness having overflowed in the first couple of years. The author’s take on this is that both parties realise that neither is growing any younger; and one makes hay while the sun shines. Thence, the sense of urgency.
 
Deep down, there is a calculating machine, whirring away. If grapes and sugarcane can be squeezed dry, why not put the spouse through the wringer? Hindu law is very egalitarian in this respect. The ‘broke’ husband can ask for alimony from the moneyed wife. It’s true; it’s the law, since 1956. Mostly, that is not the case.
 
While there is never a specific claim of a virgin birth, or, of a single-cell fission reproduction, the art of claiming possession of ‘MY child’ throws up ingenious arguments. Often, the judge talks to the child, in chambers usually, to determine what is best for the kid. While some communities have built-in mechanisms favouring the mother, many considerations are juggled around. One side wins, the other side loses. A Solomon has to come to judgement.
 
When wrangling over the custody of ‘MY child’ is over, the bargaining starts. How much? When? Why so little? Why so much? Is it fair to ME? 
 
What is the right amount to give and to take? There are no fixed scientific formulae. Judicial decisions weigh a number of factors, ranging from assets, income, style of living, age, health, number of dependants from the marriage, age of the children and their educational prospects. It’s always a tough call.
 
We advise clients to work out a fixed lump-sum amount. Warring spouses need not see each other again; especially over money, whence most battles start. The giver always demurs. Hides the assets; a criminality. Or fakes inability. The other side conjures up Herculean burdens. Ingenious excuses meet hardened counter-points. If a clean break is arrived at, excellent. If not? Maintenance payment is the answer.
 
Pre-Modi, milk was available at Rs48. Three years later, one pays Rs62. Had the learned judge factored that in? Children survive on milk, insists the custodian spouse. There must be a mechanism to compensate me: “I need more money.” Unfortunately, it’s always money. The other party cites the sanctity of a contract. 
 
Equity is a fantastic judicial tool. Some may call it an escape mechanism, others, a fudge. Even a favour. We call it a call to common sense. But does common sense have a place in law, when most think of the law as an ass?
 
Greek law has some fine pointers in such matters. A Section on family law reads: “Irrespective of the provisions of paragraph (1) the amount of child support is automatically increased by 10% every 24 months…”
 
A divorced mother sought increased funds. The ‘ex’ balked. He brought in his constitutional right to be heard; that is, heard again. He relied on the latter part of the law which said “...The Court may, following an application made by the person liable to provide child support, order that this automatic increase shall not apply and/or that the increase is restricted.”
 
You be the judge. Would you side with the mother or the father? 
 
The court, by an eight to four majority, stood up for the mother, rejecting the argument of unconstitutionality. The problem is that the law is badly drafted. But such mundane deliberations are of no use to the litigants, who want straight answers. That means that the 10% increase is justified, but disputable. WOW! 

User

Citizens Whistle Blowers Forum requests action against PricewaterhouseCoopers
Delhi-based Citizens Whistle Blowers Forum (CWBF) has requested Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Finance Minister Arun Jaitley to take immediate action against PricewaterhouseCoopers India Pvt Ltd (PwC) for allegedly posing threat to national interests.
 
CWBF, in a release says, "A number of highly disconcerting issues involving PwC, which pose serious threat to national interests, safety of investments of common man, result in significant losses to the public exchequer and which expose lack of efficacy of controls in the banking system have come to the notice of the CWBF. Further PwC has been found guilty of criminal acts by the Serious Frauds Investigation Office (SFIO) and by the Special CBI Court. Despite this, PwC is being rewarded with significant government business including those where there are direct conflicts of interest."
 
The Forum is headed by Justice AP Shah, former Chief Justice of Delhi High Court with Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan as its Member Secretary. Other members of the Forum include Prof Aruna Roy, former Finance Secretary EAS Sarma, Prof Jagdeep Chhokar, Admiral Lara Ramdas and Wajahat Habibullah, former Chief Election Commissioner. 
 
 

User

COMMENTS

Vaibhav Dhoka

4 months ago

It is rightly said that Finance minister should have initiated action but our PM said and lashed at ICAI for not taking disciplinary action on erring CAs overlooking PWC where action should have initiated long back.Catching petty CA is no great.

A BANERJEE

4 months ago

As rightly stated in the article and worth quoting: "...PwC has been found guilty of criminal acts by the Serious Frauds Investigation Office (SFIO) and by the Special CBI Court. Despite this, PwC is being rewarded with significant government business including those where there are direct conflicts of interest." It is indeed strange and shocking that a group of eminent citizens should take up the issue with FM who ought to have taken necessary action in this regard on his own. And, this happens during a nationalistic dispensation! Will the PM take this matter up in the interest of the country?

Government Agencies Also Play Dirty
All of us are familiar with the private sector indulging in sharp practices and taking customers for granted or, worse, taking them for a ride after making rosy promises and stealing their hard-earned money. Such companies are classified as cheats and frauds when they fail to fulfil their obligation to make good their promise. Some of them just vanish into thin air while many others plod...
Premium Content
Monthly Digital Access

Subscribe

Already A Subscriber?
Login
Yearly Digital+Print Access

Subscribe

Moneylife Magazine Subscriber or MAS member?
Login

Yearly Subscriber Login

Enter the mail id that you want to use & click on Go. We will send you a link to your email for verficiation

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Online Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)