Do u really think Archu is wrong? - Page 6

Originally posted by: koolsadhu1000

btw I say this much ...

Spousal support she wud NOT have got even a penny as it wud be proved in a shot that she took his lifes savings from him ...almost a crore

Infact he cud have demanded AT LEAST half the money back as he was seeking sole custody of kids and they NEEDED that money besides his salary

Child support he wud NOT give as He was seeking SOLE custody

HALF of 70 lacs ...35 lacs wud be considered MORE THAN ENUF for a woman in 6 yr marraige

Savita thing : Savita cud have easily told court that she told the child the TRUTH . As She did NOT believe LIES benefit a child .Shravni indeed was the real mother .

And if Archana tried to prove her lies , She wud have openned a can of worms ...as she had used Savita extensively for babysitting as she needed time to focus on never ending maika prroblems . Remember she was HOMEMAKER not working wife . She wid have a hard time telling court WHY she required Savitas services so much if Savita was that BAD . Same question cud be asked Shravani...if Savita was so bad WHY she left her child with her and went off ?

Both Archana and Shravni wud have stuttered a LOT in court .

Kool, if it would come to the property , the karanjkar house ... It would be proven that manav was the one who first said that he wanted to buy the house ,,,he even gave his kassam to Archana and Sulochna while Sulochna had forbidden hi mto go to the auction..

But yes, where I do agree with you is that both Shravani and Archana should hang their heads down in shame for letting Savita raise their children even though both of them knew what savita is capable of ...

In a custody case, the child's well-being is of utmost importance. That's why even if one of the spouses is not earning sufficiently, the other spouse is required to pay for child support so that the children can grow up in what the court presumes the safest environment until the child (ren) come of legal age. Legal adoption with spousal agreement is just that, legal. If it's done without the knowledge of the spouse, then it's illegal. If the spouse knows of it and doesn't do anything to stop it, again it's presumed that both spouses had reached an agreement and so it's legal. In this case, Archana did agree with Manav's decision--the proof being her presence at the lawyers' office. She did refuse at the last minute and if Manav had insisted on continuing with the adoption, it would have been illegal. He did not; so that was purely a matter of spousal decision, both agreeing, on what would be best for their child. Law does not come into the picture, and in fact this cannot be used for or against either Manav or Archana. Only when a child's well-being and safety is threatened, does law come in. That happened at the party when Archana, in full view of the holiday party, disagreed with Manav about Soham not being safe with Varsha and stubbornly gave the child to the sister with a past history of obsession with the same child. It obviously wouldn't have gone to the courts if nothing had happened and Soham was safe at the end. But Soham was kidnapped, by the woman the mother entrusted her child to against the refusal of the father, and child is now presumed dead. Law does come into the picture here because a child's safety was threatened. In this case, the mother is clearly at fault, knowingly or unknowingly, so she would not get the custody of her children. If Savita's involvement in Sachu's emotional manipulation comes up, that may or may not be taken unlawful by the court since the child was obviously healthy and safe. If Sachu said he felt unsafe with his grandmother, the court would have taken that as a point against Manav. But if Archana or Manav or both insisted on separation and the children's custody issue came up, the children would primarily be handed over to Manav not just because he had financial stability but because the courts would deem he would do a better job at keeping the children safer until they were of legal age. If Savita was deemed a threat to the children's well-being, Manav could be told by the court he had to stay separate from his mother and allow limited or no access to the children. He has done that before for Archana, he would do it again for his children if Savita's involvement in Sachin's matter came out. Whatever else has happened, it's quite clear his children are the most important to him.

It was great debating Kool , after a long time ..Happy New year to all of you from me .take care ... I am off to have some icecream now ...

Originally posted by: Tanyaz

It was great debating Kool , after a long time ..Happy New year to all of you from me .take care ... I am off to have some icecream now ...

Originally posted by: koolsadhu1000

[Happy New year to u too . Am off to my tea . Varsha Sowmya ,bhalla and all on this thread , HAPPY NEW YEAR .

Originally posted by: koolsadhu1000

I know Manav himself agreed but Archanas role was not merely backing up but she put him up to it by constantly weeping on his chest DO SOMETHING NA .

He gave her kassam that he would buy the house , even told her that he would break the FD's .She was weeping on his chetalso when he was divorcing her ...she was crying in front of him also when he said that he would trust Riyaand not her .

Manav is a grown man who makes his own decisions ...

At least this is how I have seen him ..In fact he is pretty stubborn I think ...No one can make him do somethign big if he is not willing ...

She defrauded kids for MOM . She defrauded Purvi for Manjus kid . THATS where I object to breaking of FD ...I wud not have said a WORD if she had used money for HERSELF in emergency .She raised that kid , she has full HAQ as Savita had on Manav . But she used that childs money for a stupid SHAGUN which cud have been put off by giving TOKEN MONEY or MITHAI . Shagun is actually TOKEN MONEY only .In Marathi we call it SHAKUN .

I have said myself that giving Shagun on just seeing the dulha was bad but I will not call it defraud ..If we are to talk of mother's defrauding children then savita stands in line first , miles ahead of Archana for making her son live with a lie for 18 years ...

In my eyes that is defrauding ..But this is my personal opinion ..This is where we have to say the cliched ... let's agree to disagree' ...

That massive amount wud be taken in consideration and court wud have asked Sulo if she was willing to sell house and give Manav half back for kids .If Sulo had been chalu saas and said NO as house is on her name , Manav wud have lost the claim to 35 lacs as he voluntarily signed money away . Keeping that in mind court wud not give a DIME from his salry to archana .Kids r with him , His money was already taken . AAUR KYA MAANG RAHI HAI AND ON WAT BASIS ? I am not saying this coz I criticise her , Im telling FACT . And spousal support proving is LONG tedious process in Indian courts . One gets ZILCH if Hubby flees to another country .

I am saying that ahd Archana kept the kids then he would have to pay the child support ..Now she does not have the kids so that is a different situation ...

Bu tyes , if Archu and manav divorce now and things are done properly with both of them ready to give each other what is deserved , then I think Archana would get a lot of lot of money .the girls are above 18 so shared child custody is out ..But of course this won't happen as they both love each other etc etc etc ...
Now please let me go and have my icecream ...😆

Originally posted by: Dabulls23

Hi Hopester...

Long time no see...So happy to read your posts...Well written...Hope all is well with you and the boys...Happy Holidays and a New Year...Take care dear...🤗

Hey Varshu

happy New year to you and your family too hon

thanks

I agree with your posts too😃

take care and enjoy the new year