Maintenance of a partner in Live-in Relationship
Rather than getting married, many Indians are opting for the more practical
option of having a live-in partner instead. Cohabitation refers to the sharing
of a dwelling by two individuals who are not married. In actually, there is a
considerable deal of complexity, responsibility, and legal liability involved
in what appears to be a stress- free friendship with no commitments.
Efforts
have been recently to bring it under the jurisdiction of several laws. As a
result of its judgments, the Supreme court of India has provided numerous
guidelines on child support, property rights, and a child standing, and the
crime itself has been decriminalized in the country. Different people in India
have various viewpoint on this issue. Official paperwork, cultural
difficulties, property rights, will and gift rights, anti-religion status, the
LGBT community, and so on are just examples of grey are as that need to be
handled with care.
The major goal of this essay is to help readers understand the concept of livein relationship by using secondary sources. Since then, researcher have made
an effort, using descriptive and analytical methods, to delve into the
challenges faced by modern couples. The final section of the report argues
for the need for a new law that protects the right of cohabitation couples
without regard to their religious beliefs or sexual orientation.
Two persons can live together in a "live-in relationship" if they choose not to be married. In a
large number of countries around the world, the idea is already legally recognized and
sanctioned by the law. Since the Supreme Court has decided that a man and a woman who are
in love can legally live together without violating anyone's "right to life," cohabitation is no
longer unlawful. The Malimath Committee set the stage in 2003 for the delivery of groundbreaking suggestions. It is worth noting that initially, it defined "wife" in detail, and it equated
a woman in a live-in relationship with a wife. After that, in 2005, it was included in the scope
of connections "in the form of marriage" under the Protection of Women from Domestic
Violence Act (PWDVA), which is widely recognized as the first piece of legislation to grant
legal legitimacy to relations outside of marriage. It was the first time something like this had
been written into law (Anuja Agrawal, 2012). This newly established social order has been the
subject of several attempts to regulate its dynamics in an effort to bring it under the authority
of some laws, such as those governing domestic violence, maintenance, property, and the legal
status of a child. In spite of this, there is no consensus on the subject from a social or ethical
standpoint, and the practice is still considered taboo in India.
There has been a deep respect for marriage in Indian society ever since the time of the Vedic
writings. In every era, marriage has changed and evolved. Because of changes in social norms
and individual psyches, the concept of marriage and committed relationships has also
progressed. In contrast to past generations, today's young people view cohabitation with a more
positive and accepting outlook. It may appear to be a calm, easy, and uncomplicated form of
friendship that places no legal obligations on either party; but, further examination shows a
great many responsibilities and legal consequences.
Marriage has been regarded as a sacred union in India ever since the period of the Vedic culture.
Marriages in India comply with either the personal law of the faith to which either spouse
belongs, or the guidelines of the Special Marriage Act. You can choose between these two legal
systems. Marriage is recognized by the law as an agreement between one man and one woman
to live together and take care of one another financially for the life of their union.
We now have a more modern understanding of marriage thanks to its evolution through the
ages.
The institution of marriage, once it has been completed, is universally regarded as one of the most important rights enjoyed by citizens. It's crucial from a legal perspective and involves
a variety of responsibilities for the transfer of power, the distribution of assets, and other similar
matters. Therefore, custom, openness, and selectiveness are all necessary preconditions to
being married, and all the legal consequences of getting married are necessary preconditions
as well.
Worldwide, more and more couples are opting to have their partners share the same home. The
term "live-in relationship" refers to a situation in which two people who are not married and
are not legally wedded live together. This is a long-term commitment that shares many
characteristics with marriage but is not legally recognized as such.
It's a Western concept that's
gaining traction in a lot of countries right now. In modern Indian culture, more and more people
are choosing to establish permanent residences. However, in Indian society, persons who
partake in such relationships are often looked down upon and subjected to widespread censure
and condemnation. Though the legal status of live-in relationships in India is unclear, the topic
has been clarified by a number of precedents set by the country's highest court.
There are many restrictions placed on the legality of live-in relationships in India. Even while
sharing living quarters with a significant other is not against the law or considered immoral,
the practise is frowned upon in Indian culture. The concept of a live-in relationship has
introduced a fresh facet to the man-woman dynamic in countries like India, where marriage is
traditionally regarded as the social basis upon which the legitimacy of a man-woman bond is
built.
The social dynamics of India have been subjected to certain necessary and desirable shifts as a
result of time and modernization. Long-held beliefs on Indian culture have been called into
question as a result of several judicial judgements. Nevertheless, there are still components of
society that are viewed through a patriarchal lens and are not generally accepted by the majority
of people. While there are some Indians who have come around to the idea, there are still many
others who are very much against it. Even while movies like "Luka Chhuppi" have helped
normalise the practise in Bollywood and local film, there is still considerable resistance to it.
The Allahabad High Court recognized the existence of a live-in relationship in the case Payal
Sharma v. Nari Niketan9
. The bench of Justice M. Katju and Justice R.B. Misra stated, "It is obvious from the facts of this case that the parties to the claim were living together." We believe
it is conceivable for two people who are not married to share a home. The act itself does not
break any laws, yet it is widely considered unethical. A moral code and the rule of law are not
synonymous. Subsequently, in S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal & anr10, the Supreme Court
stated that cohabitation between consenting adults outside of marriage cannot be considered a
criminal act. Furthermore, it is reported that no laws were in effect which prohibited sexual
conduct prior to marriage or cohabitation between unmarried individuals.
ESSENTIAL FOR A LIVE-IN RELATION TO BE LEGAL
According to the Act of 2005, a relationship that is considered to be "like marriage" must be in
agreement with some basic requirements that were outlined by the Supreme Court in the cases
of D Patchaiammal v. D Velusamy and Indra Sarma v. V.K.V.Sarma11. Women who are
in such relation need to required specific criteria to be benefited under PWDA, such as:
1. Age
Both parties must be of legal marriageable age in India for a wedding to take place. Meaning,
at least one of the people involved must be a college student. An Allahabad High Court judge
ruled that "a lady of about 21 years of age being a major, has right to roam anyplace and that
anyone man and woman even without getting married can live together if they desire" in the
case of Payal Katara vs. Superintendent Nari Niketan Kandri Vihar Agra and Ors12.
Nandakumar vs. The State of Kerala, a recent case decided by the High Court of Kerala,
challenged the notion that a man must be at least 21 years old to legally marry his girlfriend.
Although the legal age of marriage in the United States is 21, this choice was made anyhow.
2. A significant period
The phrase "at any point in time" is cited in section 2(f) of the PWDA, and it refers to a period
of time that is substantial or reasonable in order to sustain and preserve a relationship. Although
it can change from one instance to another based on the specifics of the case in question (Rajagopal, Krishanadas, 2010).
3. The couple must have voluntarily cohabited
When two people are in a live-in relationship, they must want to live together. It entails doing
things like supporting and caring for one another, dividing up chores and obligations,
coordinating finances, going on dates, and being together for the long haul (Auroshree , 2019).
If a man had a "keep" whom he used exclusively for sexual purposes or who could potentially
serve as a maid or slave and whom he financially supported, this would not be considered a
partnership in the nature of marriage or an equal marriage. The law does not recognise this kind
of union as marriage.
LEGAL STATUS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CHILDREN BORN OUT OF LIVEIN RELATIONSHIP
LEGAL STATUS
The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Tulsa v. Durghatiya13 that a kid born in such a
relationship would no longer be considered an illegitimate child. That verdict was upheld. The
fact that the parents had to live together for an extended period of time and be legally
recognised as a couple shows how seriously they take their romantic relationship. This is a
major consideration in the same regard.
It was not until the case of S.P.S. Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan14that children born to
unmarried parents were given official legal status. "if a man and woman are living under the
same roof and cohabiting for some years, there will be a presumption that they live as husband
and wife and the children produced to them will not be illegitimate," stated the Supreme Court
in a ruling. According to Section 114 of the Evidence Act, "if a man and a woman are living
under the same roof and cohabiting for some years, there will be a presumption that they are
husband and wife." The Court also offered its interpretation of Article 39(f) of the Indian
Constitution. This article guides India's policies towards ensuring that all children are provided
with the resources they need to grow up healthy and happy, with the respect they deserve, and
without fear of abuse or neglect. This article contains the Court's decision about the meaning
of this provision.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
The Supreme Court affirmed an inheritance given to four children born of a live-in relationship
in the case Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun15. This means that the Court has taken measures
to prevent the disinheritance of any child born as a result of a long-term cohabiting relationship.
The Supreme Court declared in the case Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan16 that a
child born to a cohabiting couple is entitled to legal legitimacy and can inherit from both
parents.
The Supreme Court ruled that a child born out of wedlock to unmarried parents living together
in a common-law partnership has no legal right to inherit the parents' Hindu ancestral
coparcenary property but may be given the right to inherit other property.
MAINTENANCE
As part of its mandate to reform the criminal justice system, the Malimath Committee was
formed in November 2000 and issued its report in 2003, in which it made various
recommendations related to the broad category of "offences against women." The revision of
Criminal Procedure Code (henceforth CrPC) Section 125, which protects the "neglected and
dependent wife, children, and parents," was one of the most innovative proposals (Anuja
Agrawal, 2012).
The Committee also examined redefining "wife" under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure
Code to include a woman who has lived with a man for an extended period of time in a domestic
relationship that is substantially similar to that of the man's marriage.
A woman needs to satisfy the aforementioned criteria in order to get PWDVA benefits. The
necessary age, independent and mutual consent, sufficient time, and adequate social standing
are all necessary.
When people live together for a week, a month, a couple of months, a one-night stand, or
multiple relationships at the same time for sexual pleasure solely, the conditions are not ideal.
It is also inappropriate for them to move in together for the sole purpose of satisfying their
sexual desire.
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court's ruling in Chanmuniya v. Chanmuniya Kumar
Singh Kushwaha17, wherein the lower court had found that the appellant wife had no claim to
support under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provides that only legally
married women may seek maintenance. The Supreme Court, recognising that Section 125 of
the Criminal Procedure Code must be examined in light of Section 26 of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, chose to award maintenance to the appellant wife instead. Women in
nonmarital partnerships are afforded the same legal protections as married wives, according to
a recent Supreme Court ruling. This conclusion was reached as a direct consequence of an
incident that occurred recently.
The Supreme Court held in Abhijit Bhikasath Auti v. State of Maharashtra and Others18
that it is not necessary to formally prove the marriage in order to file a claim for maintenance
under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, the Supreme Court has made it
clear that a petition is required to obtain maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.
Although the Supreme Court ruled that "when the woman is aware that the man with whom
she is in a live-in relationship and who already has a legally wedded wife and two children, is
not entitled to various reliefs available to a legally married wife," in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V.
Sarma19, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprised of K.S.P. Radhakrishnan and
Pinaki Chandra Ghose, JJ.
However in the same instance, the Supreme Court found that it could be unfair to deny the
victims any protection under PWDVA, 2005. Because of this, the Supreme Court emphasised
the importance of expanding the protections afforded to dependent, low-income, illiterate
individuals and their minor children by expanding the scope of Section 2(f) of the PWDVA,
2005, which addresses "domestic relationships."
STATUTORY PROVISION
In India, there is no specific law governing live-in relationships. However, there have been
several court judgments that have provided legal protection to couples in live-in relationships.
Here are some of the statutory provisions regarding live-in relationships in India:
Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: The Act defines domestic violence to include physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, and economic abuse. The Act also provides for
protection and maintenance to women in live-in relationships who are subjected to domestic
violence.
Indian Succession Act, 1925: The Act recognizes the right of a woman to inherit the property
of her partner if she has been in a live-in relationship with him for a long period of time.
Special Marriage Act, 1954: The Act provides for the registration of marriages between persons
belonging to different religions or castes. Couples in live-in relationships can also register their
relationship under this Act.
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: The Act recognizes the legal validity of marriages between Hindus.
However, it does not recognize live-in relationships as marriages.
Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: The Act provides for protection to
children from sexual abuse and exploitation. It also recognizes consensual sexual relationships
between two adolescents who are of similar age.
It is important to note that live-in relationships are not illegal in India, but they do not have the
same legal status as marriages. Therefore, it is advisable for couples in live-in relationships to
have a written agreement to protect their legal rights in case of a dispute.
Rather than getting married, many Indians are opting for the more practical option of having a live-in partner instead. Cohabitation refers to the sharing of a dwelling by two individuals who are not married. In actually, there is a considerable deal of complexity, responsibility, and legal liability involved in what appears to be a stress- free friendship with no commitments.
Efforts have been recently to bring it under the jurisdiction of several laws. As a result of its judgments, the Supreme court of India has provided numerous guidelines on child support, property rights, and a child standing, and the crime itself has been decriminalized in the country. Different people in India have various viewpoint on this issue. Official paperwork, cultural difficulties, property rights, will and gift rights, anti-religion status, the LGBT community, and so on are just examples of grey are as that need to be handled with care. The major goal of this essay is to help readers understand the concept of livein relationship by using secondary sources. Since then, researcher have made an effort, using descriptive and analytical methods, to delve into the challenges faced by modern couples. The final section of the report argues for the need for a new law that protects the right of cohabitation couples without regard to their religious beliefs or sexual orientation.
Two persons can live together in a "live-in relationship" if they choose not to be married. In a large number of countries around the world, the idea is already legally recognized and sanctioned by the law. Since the Supreme Court has decided that a man and a woman who are in love can legally live together without violating anyone's "right to life," cohabitation is no longer unlawful. The Malimath Committee set the stage in 2003 for the delivery of groundbreaking suggestions. It is worth noting that initially, it defined "wife" in detail, and it equated a woman in a live-in relationship with a wife. After that, in 2005, it was included in the scope of connections "in the form of marriage" under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (PWDVA), which is widely recognized as the first piece of legislation to grant legal legitimacy to relations outside of marriage. It was the first time something like this had been written into law (Anuja Agrawal, 2012). This newly established social order has been the subject of several attempts to regulate its dynamics in an effort to bring it under the authority of some laws, such as those governing domestic violence, maintenance, property, and the legal status of a child. In spite of this, there is no consensus on the subject from a social or ethical standpoint, and the practice is still considered taboo in India.
There has been a deep respect for marriage in Indian society ever since the time of the Vedic writings. In every era, marriage has changed and evolved. Because of changes in social norms and individual psyches, the concept of marriage and committed relationships has also progressed. In contrast to past generations, today's young people view cohabitation with a more positive and accepting outlook. It may appear to be a calm, easy, and uncomplicated form of friendship that places no legal obligations on either party; but, further examination shows a great many responsibilities and legal consequences.
Marriage has been regarded as a sacred union in India ever since the period of the Vedic culture. Marriages in India comply with either the personal law of the faith to which either spouse belongs, or the guidelines of the Special Marriage Act. You can choose between these two legal systems. Marriage is recognized by the law as an agreement between one man and one woman to live together and take care of one another financially for the life of their union. We now have a more modern understanding of marriage thanks to its evolution through the ages.
The institution of marriage, once it has been completed, is universally regarded as one of the most important rights enjoyed by citizens. It's crucial from a legal perspective and involves a variety of responsibilities for the transfer of power, the distribution of assets, and other similar matters. Therefore, custom, openness, and selectiveness are all necessary preconditions to being married, and all the legal consequences of getting married are necessary preconditions as well. Worldwide, more and more couples are opting to have their partners share the same home. The term "live-in relationship" refers to a situation in which two people who are not married and are not legally wedded live together. This is a long-term commitment that shares many characteristics with marriage but is not legally recognized as such.
It's a Western concept that's gaining traction in a lot of countries right now. In modern Indian culture, more and more people are choosing to establish permanent residences. However, in Indian society, persons who partake in such relationships are often looked down upon and subjected to widespread censure and condemnation. Though the legal status of live-in relationships in India is unclear, the topic has been clarified by a number of precedents set by the country's highest court.
There are many restrictions placed on the legality of live-in relationships in India. Even while sharing living quarters with a significant other is not against the law or considered immoral, the practise is frowned upon in Indian culture. The concept of a live-in relationship has introduced a fresh facet to the man-woman dynamic in countries like India, where marriage is traditionally regarded as the social basis upon which the legitimacy of a man-woman bond is built.
The social dynamics of India have been subjected to certain necessary and desirable shifts as a result of time and modernization. Long-held beliefs on Indian culture have been called into question as a result of several judicial judgements. Nevertheless, there are still components of society that are viewed through a patriarchal lens and are not generally accepted by the majority of people. While there are some Indians who have come around to the idea, there are still many others who are very much against it. Even while movies like "Luka Chhuppi" have helped normalise the practise in Bollywood and local film, there is still considerable resistance to it. The Allahabad High Court recognized the existence of a live-in relationship in the case Payal Sharma v. Nari Niketan9 . The bench of Justice M. Katju and Justice R.B. Misra stated, "It is obvious from the facts of this case that the parties to the claim were living together." We believe it is conceivable for two people who are not married to share a home. The act itself does not break any laws, yet it is widely considered unethical. A moral code and the rule of law are not synonymous. Subsequently, in S. Khushboo v. Kanniammal & anr10, the Supreme Court stated that cohabitation between consenting adults outside of marriage cannot be considered a criminal act. Furthermore, it is reported that no laws were in effect which prohibited sexual conduct prior to marriage or cohabitation between unmarried individuals.
ESSENTIAL FOR A LIVE-IN RELATION TO BE LEGAL
According to the Act of 2005, a relationship that is considered to be "like marriage" must be in agreement with some basic requirements that were outlined by the Supreme Court in the cases of D Patchaiammal v. D Velusamy and Indra Sarma v. V.K.V.Sarma11. Women who are in such relation need to required specific criteria to be benefited under PWDA, such as:
1. Age Both parties must be of legal marriageable age in India for a wedding to take place. Meaning, at least one of the people involved must be a college student. An Allahabad High Court judge ruled that "a lady of about 21 years of age being a major, has right to roam anyplace and that anyone man and woman even without getting married can live together if they desire" in the case of Payal Katara vs. Superintendent Nari Niketan Kandri Vihar Agra and Ors12. Nandakumar vs. The State of Kerala, a recent case decided by the High Court of Kerala, challenged the notion that a man must be at least 21 years old to legally marry his girlfriend. Although the legal age of marriage in the United States is 21, this choice was made anyhow.
2. A significant period The phrase "at any point in time" is cited in section 2(f) of the PWDA, and it refers to a period of time that is substantial or reasonable in order to sustain and preserve a relationship. Although it can change from one instance to another based on the specifics of the case in question (Rajagopal, Krishanadas, 2010).
3. The couple must have voluntarily cohabited When two people are in a live-in relationship, they must want to live together. It entails doing things like supporting and caring for one another, dividing up chores and obligations, coordinating finances, going on dates, and being together for the long haul (Auroshree , 2019). If a man had a "keep" whom he used exclusively for sexual purposes or who could potentially serve as a maid or slave and whom he financially supported, this would not be considered a partnership in the nature of marriage or an equal marriage. The law does not recognise this kind of union as marriage.
LEGAL STATUS AND PROPERTY RIGHTS OF CHILDREN BORN OUT OF LIVEIN RELATIONSHIP LEGAL STATUS
The Supreme Court ruled in the case of Tulsa v. Durghatiya13 that a kid born in such a relationship would no longer be considered an illegitimate child. That verdict was upheld. The fact that the parents had to live together for an extended period of time and be legally recognised as a couple shows how seriously they take their romantic relationship. This is a major consideration in the same regard. It was not until the case of S.P.S. Balasubramanyam v. Suruttayan14that children born to unmarried parents were given official legal status. "if a man and woman are living under the same roof and cohabiting for some years, there will be a presumption that they live as husband and wife and the children produced to them will not be illegitimate," stated the Supreme Court in a ruling. According to Section 114 of the Evidence Act, "if a man and a woman are living under the same roof and cohabiting for some years, there will be a presumption that they are husband and wife." The Court also offered its interpretation of Article 39(f) of the Indian Constitution. This article guides India's policies towards ensuring that all children are provided with the resources they need to grow up healthy and happy, with the respect they deserve, and without fear of abuse or neglect. This article contains the Court's decision about the meaning of this provision.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
The Supreme Court affirmed an inheritance given to four children born of a live-in relationship in the case Revanasiddappa v. Mallikarjun15. This means that the Court has taken measures to prevent the disinheritance of any child born as a result of a long-term cohabiting relationship. The Supreme Court declared in the case Bharatha Matha v. R. Vijaya Renganathan16 that a child born to a cohabiting couple is entitled to legal legitimacy and can inherit from both parents. The Supreme Court ruled that a child born out of wedlock to unmarried parents living together in a common-law partnership has no legal right to inherit the parents' Hindu ancestral coparcenary property but may be given the right to inherit other property.
MAINTENANCE
As part of its mandate to reform the criminal justice system, the Malimath Committee was formed in November 2000 and issued its report in 2003, in which it made various recommendations related to the broad category of "offences against women." The revision of Criminal Procedure Code (henceforth CrPC) Section 125, which protects the "neglected and dependent wife, children, and parents," was one of the most innovative proposals (Anuja Agrawal, 2012). The Committee also examined redefining "wife" under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code to include a woman who has lived with a man for an extended period of time in a domestic relationship that is substantially similar to that of the man's marriage. A woman needs to satisfy the aforementioned criteria in order to get PWDVA benefits. The necessary age, independent and mutual consent, sufficient time, and adequate social standing are all necessary. When people live together for a week, a month, a couple of months, a one-night stand, or multiple relationships at the same time for sexual pleasure solely, the conditions are not ideal. It is also inappropriate for them to move in together for the sole purpose of satisfying their sexual desire.
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court's ruling in Chanmuniya v. Chanmuniya Kumar Singh Kushwaha17, wherein the lower court had found that the appellant wife had no claim to support under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which provides that only legally married women may seek maintenance. The Supreme Court, recognising that Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code must be examined in light of Section 26 of the Americans with Disabilities Act, chose to award maintenance to the appellant wife instead. Women in nonmarital partnerships are afforded the same legal protections as married wives, according to a recent Supreme Court ruling. This conclusion was reached as a direct consequence of an incident that occurred recently. The Supreme Court held in Abhijit Bhikasath Auti v. State of Maharashtra and Others18 that it is not necessary to formally prove the marriage in order to file a claim for maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code. However, the Supreme Court has made it clear that a petition is required to obtain maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P. Although the Supreme Court ruled that "when the woman is aware that the man with whom she is in a live-in relationship and who already has a legally wedded wife and two children, is not entitled to various reliefs available to a legally married wife," in Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma19, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprised of K.S.P. Radhakrishnan and Pinaki Chandra Ghose, JJ. However in the same instance, the Supreme Court found that it could be unfair to deny the victims any protection under PWDVA, 2005. Because of this, the Supreme Court emphasised the importance of expanding the protections afforded to dependent, low-income, illiterate individuals and their minor children by expanding the scope of Section 2(f) of the PWDVA, 2005, which addresses "domestic relationships."
STATUTORY PROVISION
In India, there is no specific law governing live-in relationships. However, there have been several court judgments that have provided legal protection to couples in live-in relationships. Here are some of the statutory provisions regarding live-in relationships in India: Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005: The Act defines domestic violence to include physical, sexual, verbal, emotional, and economic abuse. The Act also provides for protection and maintenance to women in live-in relationships who are subjected to domestic violence. Indian Succession Act, 1925: The Act recognizes the right of a woman to inherit the property of her partner if she has been in a live-in relationship with him for a long period of time. Special Marriage Act, 1954: The Act provides for the registration of marriages between persons belonging to different religions or castes. Couples in live-in relationships can also register their relationship under this Act. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955: The Act recognizes the legal validity of marriages between Hindus. However, it does not recognize live-in relationships as marriages. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012: The Act provides for protection to children from sexual abuse and exploitation. It also recognizes consensual sexual relationships between two adolescents who are of similar age. It is important to note that live-in relationships are not illegal in India, but they do not have the same legal status as marriages. Therefore, it is advisable for couples in live-in relationships to have a written agreement to protect their legal rights in case of a dispute.
Comments
Post a Comment