Amendment in property rights of women draws mixed responses

Amendment in property rights of women draws mixed responses

Pune
The Union Cabinet had earlier come out with a law stating that woman enjoyed a share in all the immovable property owned by the husband in case of a divorce.
However, with a recent amendment, a woman now gets a clearly defined share but only from the residential immovable assets of her husband, which includes just the residential property rather than all the immovable assets.
“The most important aspect of the amendment is that in the eventuality of a divorce, women will be entitled to a share in the property or assets acquired by the couple after marriage. According to the prevailing law, the husband pays the woman a monthly maintenance or a one-time settlement, both of which, in most cases, are a pittance,” says Ashok Kumar, Principal and MD, Cresa Partners, India.
According to Om Ahuja, CEO – Residential Services, Jones Lang LaSalle India, the amendment will go a long way in providing women a higher degree of financial security after divorce. “In the majority of cases, residential property tends to be the largest single asset that an individual holds. As against the earlier ambiguity in terms of rights and entitlement, the amendment now specifies clearly an assured share in the residential property. By all accounts, this is a far more empowering compensation than the rather patronizing payment of maintenance,” adds Ahuja.
Additionally, a clause in the proposed amendment, gives the courts the right to reduce or waive the six months cooling period prior to the grant of a divorce. The waiving off on grounds of irretrievable breakdown, says Kumar, is significant as it will make the process much less stressful for couples who clearly do not want to be together.
Though the amendment has been lauded by many, other experts feel that this step is unfair and can disturb the economic security of women.
Says Advocate Asim Sarode, “With the new amendment, the economic security of the women is disturbed. The initial law wherein the wife would get a share in all the immovable property was quite fair. Now there will be a burden on women to gain economic support. The law should have ensured equal distributions of wealth in case of a divorce.”
Furthermore, the country currently needs to empower women which they say is not encouraged with the new law. Shashi Sharma, Chairperson, Women for Good Governance says, “If the woman is inclined to fight for her rights, family members stop her. There are emotional barriers for her while implementing her rights. The laws which increase her importance in the house and society at large and ultimately lead to her empowerment must be implemented.”
Avers Darshana Parmar Jain, Deputy Managing Director, iParmar Group, “In a country where empowering women is the order of the day, there are talks of reservations for women and education for girls; this move will not ensure equality. The law would adversely affect the rural population mainly.”
Additionally, it is also believed that the country is not ready for such a law. “This move is not the right thing to do at this stage. Probably 20 years from now when the country has progressed enough and women start getting equal opportunity in all fields should they think about such amendment. India, currently, is not ready for such a move,” Jain says.
Agrees Roopa Mudliar, Executive Director (Sales, Marketing and Business Development), Vascon Engineers Ltd, “When women come shoulder to shoulder with men, probably we won’t need this law at all. If both get equal status then women should not ask for any special thing. But looking at the current scenario where women work at home and men work out to earn a living, the women deserve a share in both moveable and immovable assets.”
In all fairness, Jain also points out the other side. “There is a very small percentage of women who take advantage and hence, in the interest of larger audience, I do not support such an amendment.”
According to Mudliar, men may take advantage of this move. “Men may take advantage of the fact that women has rights only on the immovable property and thus convert all the immovable property to movable property to avoid giving a share to their women which they deserve,” she says.
Moreover, as is the case with most progressive legislations, the main challenge lies in their implementation. Surabhi Arora, MRICS, Associate Director- Research, Colliers International says, “There is no clarity about the law as the terms are not clearly defined. Before implementing any kind of law, one should look at its implications on society as there will be an increase in number of court cases or there would be a need to set up separate court for these kind of cases.”
Sarode concludes, “There is a need for a law that is fair and applicable to all. The new amendment is not logical. We are sending letters to the law commissioner condemning this amendment. The concerned authorities ought to address this issue.”

http://content.magicbricks.com/amendment-in-property-rights-of-women-draws-mixed-responses/