On Tuesday, the Supreme Court settled a bitter marital dispute by granting a couple’s divorce and ordered the men to hand over the apartment in Mumbai to his ex -wife as maintenance. The case attracted considerable attention after a woman demanded a Crore 12 GBP and an apartment in Mumbai from her stolen husband. “>> £12 crore and apartment in Mumbai since her stolen husband.
The bench, including the main judge of India Bravai and the justice, completed the divorce on the basis of an agreed arrangement for Vinod Chandran, informed Bar and Bench.
The last time the matter was heard on July 21st, the Supreme Court expressed concern about the demands of the wife, especially due to the short marriage range and her professional background.
The main judge Gavai noted that the apartment was placed in Kalpatar, a well -known housing complex. When he learned that a woman had a MBA and worked in an IT sector, he asked, “Are you employed in places like Bengaluru and Hyderabad. Why not work?”
Cji pointed to the short duration of marriage and noted, “It only took 18 months. And you seek crore for a month?”
“She is educated and able to work”
The leader of the lawyer Madhavi Divan, representing her husband and helped the lawyer to record Prabhjit Jauhar, claimed that the woman could not expect lifelong financial support.
“She is educated and able to work,” Divan presented and marked the requirements “Excessive and unatired in a legal claim.”
The bench was then looking for records of the husband’s income tax to reach fair settlement. CJI also reminded the woman that she could not claim ownership of real estate belonging to her father -in -law.
Finally, the court offered a woman two options: either to accept an apartment without any legal burden, or to decide on a one -off settlement £4 crore.
The chief judge emphasized the importance of financial independence and said, “You are well educated. You should not be depending on the leaflets. You should earn and live with dignity.”
He also remarked: “Those who are educated and capable should not choose unemployment of the choice and then claim exaggerated maintenance.”
(Tagstotranslate) divorce
