Live-In Partner Cannot Seek Alimony: Supreme Court

SC Justices S Markandey Katju and T S Thakur proclaimed that for an unmarried woman to seek maintenance from her live-in partner, she should broadly fulfil four criteria. The couple should:

 

(1) hold themselves in-front of the society akin to husband and wife

(2) fulfil the minimum age defined to marry

(3) otherwise qualified to enter into a legal marriage including being unmarried

(4) they must have voluntarily cohabited and held themselves out to the world as being akin to spouses for a significant period of time

 

SC Justices stressed, "In our opinion, not all live-in relationships will amount to a relationship in the nature of marriage to get the benefit of the Act of 2005 (Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act).”

 

The Apex court decision arrived while passing a judgement to a certain D Velusamy who challenged a matrimonial court and Madras High Courts’ concurrent orders to pay Rs 500 as maintenance to D Patchaiammal. Petitioner Velusamy moved both the courts on the ground that he was already married to Laxmi and that Patchiammal was not married to him though they had a live-in relationship for some time. Read the story here.

 

The section 125 of CRPC defined maintenance is provided only to a legally wedded wife, dependant parents and children. Apparently, the scope of DVC (Domestic Violence Act) widened as the society progressed with the use of the expression ‘domestic relationship’, which is not just a married relationship but a relationship 'in the nature of marriage' as well.  

 

Elaborating the expression of ‘domestic relationship’ the bench said, “Unfortunately this expression has not been defined in the Act (DVC). In feudal society, sexual relationship between man and woman outside marriage was totally taboo and regarded with disgust and horror."