Harmeeta Singh vs. Rajat Taneja [142 (2007) DLT 377]

Introduction:

Marriage is an uncommon connection between Husband and Wife. It is sine qua non for family agreement and security. Being thusly, overseeing bodies all around the world have given certain rights and constrained certain responsibilities on a couple which are fundamental constituents of any family. In old events, marriage was seen as picked by God, and blessedness was connected with it. It is seen as a blessed social association. Marriage, as shown by the Hindu Law, is a sublime relationship for the execution of strict commitments. Marriage isn’t an arrangement anyway it is a Sanskar or Sacrament.

The Sanskar named that once a woman is given in marriage, she should shield her immaculateness as significantly after as before her significant other’s destruction.” According to the Mahabharata, spouse isn’t only a wellspring of Dharma, Artha and Kama “yet what’s more a wellspring of Moksha”. In Ramayana, the spouse is supposed to be the basic soul of her significant other.

Facts

Both the plaintiff and the defendant were mutually wedded newly married couples domiciled in India till their marriage till the time the respondent was not offered a gainful job. Thereafter the respondent was gainfully employed and resident in the United States of America. Soon after their marriage in India and their takeoff to the United States of America, she was supposedly constrained by the lead of Vikas to leave the marital home Lacking necessary financial resources, and other support, she was compelled to return to India. 

She filed a suit in the High Court of Delhi, for Maintenance under the Hindu Adoptions & Maintenance Act, 1956, in the course of which some Orders were passed. The following date of proceedings in the United States of America was planned for 9.11.1999 and because of the Court excursions, it was impractical to articulate the requests before that date. It was presented that if hearing happens in the Courts at Connecticut, U.S.A. these proceedings might be delivered infructuous.

Issues

Whether the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance was applicable to the Plaintiff?

Legislations Referred

• Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956.
• Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

Contention of Plaintiff

Plaintiff filed a suit in the Delhi High Court against her husband for maintenance under Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act as she cannot submit to the jurisdiction in the courts of the United States as she was lacking behind financially and their marriage was accustomed in accordance with Indian Hindu laws.

Contention of Defendant

Defendant was contented to initiate proceedings in the courts of the United States.

Rationale

The Court mentioned some other objective facts while passing this request, predominantly that regardless of whether the husband prevailing with regards to getting a separation decree in the US, that decree would be probably not going to get acknowledgment in India as the Indian court had locale in the issue and the ward of the US courts would need to be set up under Section 13, CPC.

The Court at that point said that till the US decree was perceived in India, he would be held liable for perpetrating plural marriage in India and would be at risk to confront criminal activity for that. The court likewise said that since the spouse’s stay in the US was transient, transitory, and easygoing, and she may not be monetarily equipped for indicting the prosecution in the US court, the Delhi courts would be the gathering of comfort in the issue.

Judgment

Courts in India would without a doubt have jurisdiction over the disputes between the current companions since the marriage was acted in New Delhi. Having monetary just as family uphold in this nation it would be comparatively easy for the Defendant (Husband) to start separate from procedures in this nation. The Plaintiff (Wife) would not be in a situation to challenge the purview of Matrimonial Courts in New Delhi. The discussion of accommodation, which is an idea very much perceived and executed in the United States of America, would subsequently be New Delhi.

The Plaintiff (Wife) has not submitted to the jurisdiction of the Courts in the United States of America. With regards to their dwelling together as a couple, the Plaintiff’s stay in the United States of America could well be seen as transient, brief and easygoing. The court is very certain that a portion of these elements can apply to the spouse likewise with respect to New Delhi, however the reality remains that he could advantageously indict suit in New Delhi, while it is monetarily unthinkable for the Plaintiff (Wife) to do as such. Having not gotten the Spouse Visa she may not be in a situation to enter the United States of America.

It is in the above conditions, till the following date of hearing, the court controls the Defendant (Husband) from proceeding with the procedures in the United States of America emerging out of File No. 2-3-06139-1SEA forthcoming in the Superior Court of Washington County of King, Judge/Commissioner Richard D. Eadie/Richard A. Jones.

Conclusion

The subject of Conflict of Laws in Divorce Cases is picking up growing criticalness. The huge number of states and distant countries in which a noteworthy number of our mind-boggling business organizations, using a great many administrators and delegates, are driven requires incalculable amounts of their workers to live a long way from their homes. Our wealthy classes are finding a growing have a great time travel and short-lived remains in different pieces of the country.

It isn’t exceptional for a well of a person to have a winter home in one express, a pre-summer home in another, a delight spare in one more, perhaps a living plan at a watering put abroad, and lead his business in various states and nations. The brisk techniques for transportation which we acknowledge in the Joined States today bear our family opportunities to head out to an ever-expanding degree and to harp on different events in the midst of the year in a couple of particular states. Changes of home from state to state are more relentless with us today than some other time in ongoing memory before ever of the country.