Marriage or live-in relationship and why?

Answer 1

Live in relationship is just a mutual understanding between two person of different or same sex to live together, share a common household luxuries & even indulge in sex with each others consent. Legally they have no liabilities against each other, nor do they get any legal rights that they can enforce against each other which only a married couple have. The right to residence, right to inheritance, right to bear legitimate children, right to claim insurance as a legal spouse etc is the various legal rights only married couples have & not live in relationship people. These rights are provided in the matrimonial laws which govern the parties even the Protection Of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, clearly provides in section 2(f) "domestic relationship" means a relationship between two persons who live or have, at any point of time, lived together in a shared household, when they are related by consanguinity, marriage, or through a relationship in the nature of marriage, adoption or are family members living together as a joint family; no where it includes such live partners as one of my friend here has tried to misguide you & all by including such relationship in the definition of domestic relationship. The very fact if this was the intention of the legislature to include all sort of ladies in a house in this definition they would not have specified the words such as ‘consanguinity’, ‘marriage’, ‘through a relationship in the nature of marriage’, ‘adoption’, or ‘are family member’, if that was so even the domestic helper who visit the house for doing house hold work will also be a part of the domestic relationship. The intention of legislature was to include all those ladies in this definition who were part & parcel of the family, whether she is wife,mother,daughter,sister,grand mother, grand daughter etc as these were all a part of the family, but any lady who just came & started living in the house just for short period of time & indulged in sex with one of the family member with her own consent cannot be brought in equality with other women of the family unless she gets legally married with some male member of this family & gets a legal status of wife & then only she can be included in the same category as other women in the family. If the male member of such family brings any prostitute for his sexual urge, no one will recognize such a prostitute as the member of this family & equate her with other family women who have status & dignity in the family & the society. The status of any live in female partner in the society is nothing more then that of a prostitute & we in Indian society cannot give such a person status of wife even if she is living for long period of time with any person without even performing any form of marriage ceremonies although just short of the valid marriage ceremonies to call it a complete valid marriage, even if some sort of marriage ceremonies took place between such two people still we could include her in this category of domestic relationship, but without even any form of ceremonies the person walks in & starts living as partner cannot be said to give her any family status. This status of a lady who got married to a man who was already married, although such second marriage of this man was void but here the second wife was given status of wife for the purpose of her maintenance & legitimacy of her children by the courts in India. Let me point out a land mark judgment of the Supreme Court of India in this regard Reema Aggarwal V/S Anupam and Ors Appeal (crl.) 25 of 2004. Even in this case the accused husband had married this second wife during the lifetime of his first wife & was charged for demanding dowry from his second wife, inflicted cruelty & attempted to murder her for dowry, the Supreme Court had recognized such second wife status for charging the accused husband under section 307,498A of Indian Penal Code. The question getting a second wife is different from just keeping a lady for sexual activities by a man & these two cannot be equated as one. With a live in partner relationship you can change your partner as & when you require but same thing can’t happen when you marry some one for first or second time. The concept of marriage has been recognized not recently but for time immemorial as in the words of the learned Judges of the Supreme Court “Parties to a marriage tying nuptial knot are supposed
to bring about the union of souls. It creates a new
relationship of love, affection, care and concern between
the husband and wife. According to Hindu Vedic philosophy
it is sanskar a sacrament; one of the sixteen important
sacraments essential to be taken during one's lifetime.
There may be physical union as a result of marriage for
procreation to perpetuate the lineal progeny for ensuring
spiritual salvation and performance of religious rites, but
what is essentially contemplated is union of two souls.
Marriage is considered to be a junction of three important
duties i.e. social, religious and spiritual.” As far saying to avoid the provisions of law of inheritance one can make a will for his her own property, agreed, but what about the property, its share or right to enjoy it, which such a person will inherent being a part of the family from any other family member of her or his spouse as the case may be. Any thing which is not getting any legal recognition cannot be made legal by quoting wrong provisions of law & misguiding others. There is no question of de facto recognition of such live in relationship at least in India as no civilized person of the society will agree to such relationship in his or her family or neighborhood as the case may be, as far de jure recognition is concerned, no legislature will ever enact any such law giving legal recognition to such relationship at least in India where 1 billion people,i.e. one sixth the population of the world live, what these small countries with small population do is none of our concern.
Although live in relationship has been legally recognized in some countries but in India it is neither legally nor socially recognized. These people indulging in living in relationship may represent in society as married couple for the purpose of leasing a flat or place to live, or avoid any social boycott by the people amongst with they live or work in the India society, but such mere declaration doesn't give them legal rights which only a legally married couple have. The purpose of marriage certificate issued by a competent legal authority such as the registrar of marriages is not only a mere legal document but it is the most important piece of document when it comes handy to all sort of legal issues as I stated above. These live in couples don't process such legal documents & if they have to seek any legal help anytime regarding each other they won't get any. The live in relationship only save their time & money, incase they fail to continue this relationship anytime in their life & they can simply walk out of each other's life just without going through any legal formalities which is required in case of legally married couples, who have to go through the complete judicial process that is provided in the matrimonial law according to which they got married. In that case they get their legal rights of maintenance, custody of child, settlement of their properties & place of residence too decided accordingly. The live in relationship doesn't have any legal right to claim all these, incase the give birth to any child, its the mother who gets the legal guardianship of the illegitimate child , if the father wants it & the mother agrees for it then he can be the legal guardian of this illegitimate child too. The question of maintenance to any live in partner doesn't arise as such in law, unless their relationship were long enough to be considered as relationship of husband & wife. I state this is based on a recent Delhi High Court Judgment where a lady who lived with a man for long period of time although their marriage was illegal & void in the eye of law was granted her claim of maintenance for herself & her children. The judgment I quote here is based on illegal & void marriage where a marriage ceremony took place although that marriage was void in law. How far court will allow such a claim of maintenance in case of live in partner is a question of law & facts, whether their long staying together be considered as marriage although no legal ,valid marriage ceremonies took place between them, is a issue only the court can decide, prime ficia such live in relationship will not be considered as marriage between them, but to get this benefit of maintenance the main consideration that will be weighed by the court will be the period of their stay together as well how their relationship was recognized by the society, all these are matter of facts which they have to bring on records of the court to decide such an issue. After reading all these legal issues regarding such live in relationship & complications involved in such relationship, I doubt any sensible person will like to go in for it unless it is for very short period just for the purpose of sexual gratification amongst the people involved in such relationship.

Answer 2

Marriage

Answer 3

Marriage.
While I am not against pre-marital sex if the people really love each other, I am against co-habitation. When a couple lives together, the female half is still the one who tends to do the bulk of the housework and child-rearing--things men used to get exclusively from their wives. This opens women up to being taken advantage of.
Also, if the relationship dissolves or one partner dies, unless there is a will of some sort, the remaining partner gets nothing. Marriage provides women with a lot more leverage to negogiate what they want if the relationship goes bad.

Answer 4

Whatever BOTH partners want from the relationship.

You have to be on the same page with this, if one partner feels like the live in relationship will lead to marriage but the other doesn't then you headed for trouble.

Answer 5

... whatever both partners choose and think it´s the best for them... maybe for many people marriage is the only way to live together with a partner due to education, traditions, etc, but things are changing all over the world.
Others are strictly against marriage and don´t even want to mention it, as they say it is the best way to kill love and it´s just another name for women's slavery...
All I can do is recommend my own experience, as I don´t know others. I lived together for almost one year with my husband before getting married and it was the best for us.
Everybody should be free to choose his / her own way of life.

Answer 6

Marriage!
There is no much difference between live-in and marriage while living together. It becomes different when you want to get separated.

Answer 7

personally i would prefer live-in...but then again i am divorced and i have gone through all the hassle. i think it really depends on the couple and what they are comfortable with. if we choose not to have kids, then i am all for live-in because it's a simpler arrangement - logistically that is and i don't think it has any bearing on how you feel towards each other.

but if we plan to have children then i would definitely go for marriage cos it's fairer to the children.

Answer 8

My wife and I lived together for 6 years before we got married. There was no change before or after. I think commitment comes from the heart not from some document signed in a church or city hall.

Answer 9

I think live-in, take a test drive first

Answer 10

Live-in, though i am personally not in that.

But both partner should make sure they can survive themself during older age...

Answer 11

I have been married and divorced......now have been living with my new man for 15 years and am happy to stay that way......why?.....why fix it if it ain't broke! ; )