crucial case regarding alimony avoid

853 votes

Hi there, lying to court will lead to serious consequences not just limited to contempt cases. You should speak truth in court and let the Judge know about the procedural and technical lapeses. It's advisable to contact me and provide requisite details to assist you better.

Advocate Ishan Parashar LawRato

622 votes

If the MOU is filed in court, it’s a binding commitment. Claiming false cohabitation to avoid payment is risky; the court requires proof for such claims. If proven false, the judge can initiate contempt proceedings or dismiss the plea. Stay firm; the court usually enforces agreed terms.

Advocate Pankaj Bajaj LawRato

536 votes

Ma’am once undertaking is given in court the person is bound. If he intentionally delays the proceedings or not complying with the undertaking. However, he has to pay what he agrees and without the order of the court he cannot stop paying if agreed in undertaking. For precise advise detailed analysis of your facts is necessary.

Advocate Harshit R Gupta LawRato

746 votes

If there's no scope of living together then rather stretching the relationship you should file for contested divorce under the ground of cruelty. I would suggest you to go with mutual divorce because it's cost effective and ends up in a maximum of six months. For more legal assistance I am just a call away.

Advocate Jitender Singh LawRato

646 votes

No. The male client cannot stop paying the first-motion amount merely because the first motion was delayed or by falsely alleging cohabitation. If an MoU/settlement was signed in the Women Cell and filed before the court, its terms are binding on both parties. A delay of about 3 months in recording the first motion does not cancel or reduce the payment obligation, unless the MoU or a specific court order clearly states that payment is conditional on the original date. A mere allegation of cohabitation is not sufficient. The burden of proof lies on the male to establish that the parties actually resumed cohabitation. If the female side states on record that no meeting or cohabitation ever took place, and the male has no proof, the court will reject his claim and may view it as a delay tactic. Regarding contempt: - If payment of the first-motion amount is directed by the court, deliberate non-payment can amount to wilful disobedience, and the court may take a strict view, including costs or adverse orders. - If the amount is mentioned in the MoU but not yet ordered by the court, strict contempt may not apply, but the court can enforce the settlement and treat the male’s conduct as bad faith, which can affect further proceedings, including the second motion. If the male is found to be making false statements to delay or reduce alimony, the court can record adverse observations, reject his plea, and proceed on the basis of the settlement.

Advocate Jasmeet Kaur Makkar LawRato