Couple of right legal age indulging in sex are husband and wife: HC

[prasad1]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

Are we following the western practice of redefining marriage?

In a ruling which might have a far reaching impact, Madras High Court has said if a couple in the right legal age indulge in sexual gratification, it will be considered a valid marriage and they could be termed as husband and wife.


"..if any couple choose to consummate their sexual cravings, then that act becomes a total commitment with adherence to all consequences that may follow, except on certain exceptional considerations," Justice C S Karnan said in his order.


He said that marriage formalities of tying a mangalsutra, garlands and rings were only for the satisfaction of society. Either party could approach a family court for declaration of marital status by producing documentary proof for a sexual relationship.


The judge also said once such a declaration is obtained, the couple can establish self as each others' spouse in any government records. Justice Karnan made these observations in his order yesterday while modifying an April 2006 judgement of a family court in a maintenance case.


A family court in Coimbatore had ordered a man to pay Rs 500 maintenance per month to his two children and Rs 1000 as litigation expenses and had held that the woman's wedding with him did not have any documentary proof.


In his judgement, Justice Karnan directed the man to pay her maintenance of Rs 500 a month from the date of petition (September 2000) and that the arrears be paid within three months.

 

[kunjuppu]

this is good for a lot of 'chinna veedu' cases.

the guys, used to have a good time, set these up initially, and abandon them. now they have a lifelong obligations towards the resultant children. will make guys think twice before indulging in this type of relationships.

 

[palindrome]

"marriage formalities of tying a mangalsutra, garlands and rings were only for the satisfaction of society"

One case -- couple married for 6 years, unconsummated, husband has bipolar (so can't do it).
Another case -- couple married for 9 years, unconsummated, husband is diabetic (so can't do it).

Wonder how "marriage" is defined in these cases. Wife in both above cases express sadness but not willing to walk out of marriage (both speak highly of spouse).

 

[sangom]

I feel this is a knotty issue and may go up to the Supreme Court in due course; we will then know the final word on this. Basically we have separate law concerning hindu, christian, etc., marriages and, to the best of my knowledge, consummation is not a sine qua non for a marriage to become a valid marriage, according to these legislations. By the same argument, therefore, sexual consummation between two consenting adults cannot by itself be equal to a full-fledged marriage; may be we will, in future, have quasi-marriages!

 

[C RAVI]

I feel this is a knotty issue and may go up to the Supreme Court in due course; we will then know the final word on this. Basically we have separate law concerning hindu, christian, etc., marriages and, to the best of my knowledge, consummation is not a sine qua non for a marriage to become a valid marriage, according to these legislations. By the same argument, therefore, sexual consummation between two consenting adults cannot by itself be equal to a full-fledged marriage; may be we will, in future, have quasi-marriages!

Absolutely!! I hold the same opinion.

 

[kunjuppu]

I feel this is a knotty issue

sangom,

did you mean naughty?

 

[Govinda]

sangom,

did you mean naughty?

No.Sir. He meant 'nutty issue'

 

[sangom]

sangom,

did you mean naughty?

naughty, nutty, and also knotty - full of knots to be resolved. For example suppose an adult woman has sex with two adult males on consecutive nights (days!) will not the second one be invalid as a legal marriage? If so, the male has merely to prove that the adult woman with whom he had sexual gratification, had had her sexual gratification in the immediate past with some other adult male - and the accused male is absolved of "palimony" or "alimony" or maintenance, whatever it may be.

One channel closed its discussion tonight with the anchor woman signing off saying "man-woman relations are a complex social issue as it is; let the courts not complicate it more!"

 

[renuka]

Are we following the western practice of redefining marriage?

In a ruling which might have a far reaching impact, Madras High Court has said if a couple in the right legal age indulge in sexual gratification, it will be considered a valid marriage and they could be termed as husband and wife.


"..if any couple choose to consummate their sexual cravings, then that act becomes a total commitment with adherence to all consequences that may follow, except on certain exceptional considerations," Justice C S Karnan said in his order.


He said that marriage formalities of tying a mangalsutra, garlands and rings were only for the satisfaction of society. Either party could approach a family court for declaration of marital status by producing documentary proof for a sexual relationship.

What!! This is utter nonsense!

What has sex got to do with marriage?

Some might want to have sex without the idea of getting married too...so that removes the individuals freedom of expressing themselves sexually.


This is just being totally unfair and down right dumb I feel.

If they go by this definition that

if a couple in the right legal age indulge in sexual gratification, it will be considered a valid marriage and they could be termed as husband and wife.

that means Polygamy and Polyandary is LEGAL!LOL

Wow! Ultra Conservative TN has legalized Polygamy and Polyandry!



So going by this... for those who want to play safe.... one should NOT go beyond Base 2 or Base 3..cos the legal definition of sexual intercourse is Base 4!LOL

 

[Raji Ram]

How does the court get PROOF?! :spy:

 

[renuka]

How does the court get PROOF?! :spy:

Dear RR ji,

Couples can record themselves in action(and produce it to the Judge) with the background song of

thaaliyE thEvaillai nii thaan en ponjchaadhi
thaambuulam thEvai illai nii thaan en saripaadhi

uRavOdu piRanthathu piRanthathu
usurOdu kalanthathu kalanthathu

maamaa maamaa niithaan niithaanE

adi siRukki… nii thaan ena manasukkuLLE
ada kiRukki…. nii thaan en usurukkuLLE

unna ninaichchi.. naan nadanthEn en uurukkuLLE

 

[கால பைரவன்]

Indian media is known to mislead readers with such provocative titles. It is a pity the OP and some members participating in this thread too fell for it.

This particular observation by Madras High Court is specific to this case, that too in the context of providing support. This observation does not seem to be binding on any other case. This is not about pre-marital sex. The petitioner and the respondent have lived together for many years with two kids resulting from such co-habitation.

Please read article here:
Misreading the Madras HC ruling: Premarital sex is not marriage - Firstpost

In this case, the man had signed in the ‘live birth report’ of his second child and given his consent for a Caesarean section for its birth. As such, he had officially admitted that she was his wife. “Without legal encumbrance or third party interference or without affecting third party rights, both the petitioner and the respondent lived together as spouses and begot two children.” Therefore, the question of an illegitimate relationship did not arise. Wedding solemnisation was only a customary right, but not a mandatory one. Hence, the judge said, he was treating the couple as spouses in normal life.

It is not disputed that the petitioner has been a spinster before she gave birth and that the respondent was a bachelor before developing sexual relationship with the petitioner. Both of them led their marital life under the same shelter and begot two children. Therefore, the petitioner’s rank has been elevated as the ‘wife’ of the respondent and likewise, the respondent’s rank has been elevated as the ‘husband’ of the petitioner. Therefore, the children born to them are legitimate children and the petitioner is the legitimate wife of the respondent.

This is not the first case of this type. The relationship described in this case is perhaps similar to common law marriage.

 

[renuka]

Indian media is known to mislead readers with such provocative titles. It is a pity the OP and some members participating in this thread too fell for it.

This particular observation by Madras High Court is specific to this case, that too in the context of providing support. This observation does not seem to be binding on any other case. This is not about pre-marital sex. The petitioner and the respondent have lived together for many years with two kids resulting from such co-habitation.

Please read article here:
Misreading the Madras HC ruling: Premarital sex is not marriage - Firstpost




This is not the first case of this type. The relationship described in this case is perhaps similar to common law marriage.

Dear Kala Bhairavan Ji,


Thank you for clearing all our doubts...so now its safe for everyone who indulges in Pre or Extra Marital Relationships.

 

[Raji Ram]

Thank you K B Sir!

So, that guy wished to ditch his partner after she gave birth to two children.

It is very easy to prove that the children are his, by a DNA test!

 

[sarang]

Marriage of convenience!

In this case the unmarried quasi husband has signed several papers posing as husband. Leaving a paper trail is sure way to 'bars'.

Another funny fallout from this case. The quasi husband has to get divorce from the quasi wife if he wants to experiment with real marriage.

I feel this is a knotty issue and may go up to the Supreme Court in due course; we will then know the final word on this. Basically we have separate law concerning hindu, christian, etc., marriages and, to the best of my knowledge, consummation is not a sine qua non for a marriage to become a valid marriage, according to these legislations. By the same argument, therefore, sexual consummation between two consenting adults cannot by itself be equal to a full-fledged marriage; may be we will, in future, have quasi-marriages!

 

[renuka]

Since the court is willing to recognize live in relationships where sexual intercourse takes place as a legal marriage...so going by this many can opt to live in and save money as compared to spending a huge amount for weddings.

So every cloud has a silver lining even though the cloud might be Danuja Neera Dhara (so called Asuric cloud in terms of Morals) but now even the Sameera(Breeze) of legality has given it a stay order and not blown it away on Moral grounds......so no need for anyone now to sing Pahi Maam(save me) from the Moral Police of society.

 

[sarang]

In a judgement, the judge makes several observations and incidents which are relevant to the case. They are not binding and not necessarily implementable.

Even though the marriage is not registered, father of two has littered solid proof that he is the husband. Perhaps that is why he lost. Even when documents (will, sale deeds etc.) are not registered, they are held valid, if mal practice cannot be proved.

Anyway, in future, living in couple must sign agreements on the scope financial liabilities, and sharing of expenses and assets; or else the boy will find that he is stripped of all essentials - roof, savings, and honour.

Since the court is willing to recognize live in relationships where sexual intercourse takes place as a legal marriage...so going by this many can opt to live in and save money as compared to spending a huge amount for weddings.

So every cloud has a silver lining even though the cloud might be Danuja Neera Dhara (so called Asuric cloud in terms of Morals) but now even the Sameera(Breeze) of legality has given it a stay order and not blown it away on Moral grounds......so no need for anyone now to sing Pahi Maam(save me) from the Moral Police of society.

 

[sangom]

Indian media is known to mislead readers with such provocative titles. It is a pity the OP and some members participating in this thread too fell for it.

This particular observation by Madras High Court is specific to this case, that too in the context of providing support. This observation does not seem to be binding on any other case. This is not about pre-marital sex. The petitioner and the respondent have lived together for many years with two kids resulting from such co-habitation.

Please read article here:
Misreading the Madras HC ruling: Premarital sex is not marriage - Firstpost




This is not the first case of this type. The relationship described in this case is perhaps similar to common law marriage.

Shri KB,

Thank you very much. But even TV channels seem to have fallen for the title!!

 

[renuka]

Anyway, in future, living in couple must sign agreements on the scope financial liabilities, and sharing of expenses and assets; or else the boy will find that he is stripped of all essentials - roof, savings, and honour.

This is like a Pre Nuptial agreement..in this case a Pre Living In agreement.

I feel this is important even in couples opting for a traditional marriage too cos as it is we can hear the faint cry of those who are crying that women are stripping them of all essentials like roof,savings and honour even before getting married.

But seriously..Pre Nup is a good idea for any sort of arrangement traditional marriage or live in relationships so that it will fair to both males and females...I have seen lots of cases where wives contributed nothing to house financially and had maids etc but yet got away with almost everything in divorces...these types are Good Housekeepers..they get to keep the house!LOL

 

[prasad1]

Justice C.S. Karnan of the Madras High Court has said that the remedy he had given in his ruling on the status of unmarried couples involved in a sexual relationship was “not only for the purpose of giving relief to the victim woman, but also to maintain the cultural integrity of India.”


In a statement released in Chennai on Wednesday, following a furore in the media and the mixed reactions to his verdict, the judge said, “If a bachelor aged 21 years or above and a spinster aged 18 years or above had pre-marital sex with intention to marry and, subsequent to this, the man deserts the woman, the victim woman can approach a civil forum for remedy after producing necessary substantial evidence to grant her social status as wife.”


Justice Karnan said the law provided for criminal proceedings against a man for cheating and deserting a woman after making a promise of marriage, but there was no provision for her to approach a civil forum for remedy. Therefore, being the apex court for the State and a constitutional authority, the High Court had granted this relief.

 

[renuka]

Justice C.S. Karnan of the Madras High Court has said that the remedy he had given in his ruling on the status of unmarried couples involved in a sexual relationship was “not only for the purpose of giving relief to the victim woman, but also to maintain the cultural integrity of India.”


In a statement released in Chennai on Wednesday, following a furore in the media and the mixed reactions to his verdict, the judge said, “If a bachelor aged 21 years or above and a spinster aged 18 years or above had pre-marital sex with intention to marry and, subsequent to this, the man deserts the woman, the victim woman can approach a civil forum for remedy after producing necessary substantial evidence to grant her social status as wife.”


Justice Karnan said the law provided for criminal proceedings against a man for cheating and deserting a woman after making a promise of marriage, but there was no provision for her to approach a civil forum for remedy. Therefore, being the apex court for the State and a constitutional authority, the High Court had granted this relief.

Dear Prasad ji,

Why does Justice Karnan take it for granted that only a man will desert a woman after sexual intercourse and promising marriage?

A woman too might decide to change her mind after a while...and guys might feel cheated too.

This will put pressure on anyone before pursuing a relationship cos it would be "dangerous" to have pre marital sex with a partner if there are legal bonds that can declare even a short term relationship a "marriage"...I hope all these does not increase the likelihood of rape cos some men might think rape is less hassle cos it wont be called "marriage".

 

[prasad1]

Indian media is known to mislead readers with such provocative titles. It is a pity the OP and some members participating in this thread too fell for it.

This particular observation by Madras High Court is specific to this case, that too in the context of providing support. This observation does not seem to be binding on any other case. This is not about pre-marital sex. The petitioner and the respondent have lived together for many years with two kids resulting from such co-habitation.

Please read article here:
Misreading the Madras HC ruling: Premarital sex is not marriage - Firstpost




This is not the first case of this type. The relationship described in this case is perhaps similar to common law marriage.

Justice C.S. Karnan said

He said that marriage formalities of tying a mangalsutra, garlands and rings were only for the satisfaction of society. Either party could approach a family court for declaration of marital status by producing documentary proof for a sexual relationship.

What part of op misrepresented the Judge's ruling?

Please do not lecture in holier than thou tone. We all derive our conclusions from our understanding, and consequently arrive at our position on a any topic. The institute of marriage is somehow "devine", but society is slowly redefining marriage. Marriage lost something of religious significance when civil marriages were accepted. "Marriage" again lost some more of religious significance when marriage age kept slipping. Marriage as we know has lost even more with pre-marital sex, live-in arrangements, gender-benders, and homosexuality is rewriting the relationship outside of traditional marriage.

 

[prasad1]

Dear Prasad ji,

Why does Justice Karnan take it for granted that only a man will desert a woman after sexual intercourse and promising marriage?

A woman too might decide to change her mind after a while...and guys might feel cheated too.

This will put pressure on anyone before pursuing a relationship cos it would be "dangerous" to have pre marital sex with a partner if there are legal bonds that can declare even a short term relationship a "marriage"...I hope all these does not increase the likelihood of rape cos some men might think rape is less hassle cos it wont be called "marriage".

You are right.
But traditionally man is the breadwinner, and generally women gets the alimony, and child support as she ends up holding the bag. This being a civil suit, it came to this court for financial obligation. If it was a rape it would have gone to a criminal court.

judge directed the woman’s husband to pay her a monthly maintenance of Rs.500 from the date of petition, i.e. from September 2000. The arrears of maintenance up to May this year should be paid within a period of three months.