Can Supreme court save Lakhs of homes of old persons from radical evil feminists at WCD.

The new DV law (Oct 2006) practically allows a wife to occupy any of the houses she had ever stayed in.

Persons save full life for making a house they can stay in the old age. With this LAW they will be thrown out of the own build houses by the daughter-in-law.

With more then 10,000 ( Ten thousand )complaints of matrimonial discord in delhi alone last year, almost all of these now will use the DV LAW.  The LAW says the house can be of a friend or relative or rented. It do not matter how much time back the wife stayed in the house.

The are many poblems with this new LAW made by radical feminists at ministry of Women and Child development, one of the major onces i.e., the house of friend or relative of husband in new Domestic LAW, is a major battle point between the Supreme court on one side and Govt. funded radical feminists, funded NGO's and their press agents on the other.

The case that triggered this fight, the house was on Husbands mother's name, they allege that the son's wife sent them to jail along with the son on the dreaded LAW, non bailable 498a ( mental torture by asking for dowry). Then she broke the lock of house and started living in the house. After coming from Jail, the Husband's mother was not allowed entry in her own house. The wife's lawyer argued that since Domestic violence act ( Oct 2006 ) made by ministry of women and child development ministy is already passed by parliament, there is no question of wife leaving the house of husband's mother.

Judgement copy is at

http://ipc498a.files.wordpress.com/2007/04/sc-reject-righttoresidenceunderdva-batravsbatra-2007.pdf

Supreme court said the house can be given to wife only if the house is owned by husband. In case of rented house husband has to pay the rent, otherwise this will lead to choes in society.

The feminists press and media agents were immediately all over the press and media. Indira Jaising ( president of one of All India Women's organization ) said this supreme court judgement to let the old couple have their own house is step back for women empowerment. Most are saying in TV and papers that this defeats the pourpose of making the Domestic violence act (Oct. 2006). They want the wife to have the most expensive relatives or friends house that the wife lived in at any point of time during the marriage.

Anti feminists organizations which are not funded by Ministry of women and child development like feminists organization, are obviously trying to fight feminists press agents over this.

Check out

http://feministmedia.wordpress.com/2007/10/30/anniversary-of-the-abomination-called-pwdva-2005/

http://presentindia.blogspot.com/2006/11/loopholes-in-domestic-violence-bill.html

http://dvact.awardspace.com/index.php?module=index ( some portions may be blocked in India )

http://savemarriages.wordpress.com/2006/11/10/the-domestic-violence-law-of-india-a-shield-or-a-sword/

http://indiatalking.com/blog/swarup/4631/

Lets pray that feminists funded by ministry of women and child development are defeated by the supreme court, for the sake of old persons houses. To ensure that our old persons and children do not suffer by fatherless families as wanted by Govt. funded radical feminists.

http://www.dvmen.org/dv-15.htm#restraint

http://www.dvstats.com/

http://www.dontmakehermad.com/

Feminists propaganda.

http://www.centredaily.com/220/story/35314.html

Indira Jaising will not let you know that it is for occupying the house.

"A woman subject to domestic violence [was] afraid to seek remedies to end the
violence - in law or otherwise - for fear of being evicted from her household or
being denied access to funds necessary to maintain herself and her children,"
says Mandeep Tiwana, from the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative in New Delhi.