Application: Fill & Download for Free

The SNP have consistently wanted to Scotland to have EU membership.This has been their position before, during and after the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum, and before, during and after the 2016 EU Referendum. Regardless of how helpful a second Referendum on Brexit might be to their aim of Scottish Independence, Scotland as a member of the EU is a position they hold in its own right.In fact, after Cameron’s re-election in 2015, as the EU Referendum Bill was being drafted by his Government, Nicola Sturgeon arguably prioritised retaining EU Membership for Scotland over her chances at a second Independence referendum with an amendment that Cameron rejected.“I previously stated my view that if Scotland were to be taken out of Europe despite voting as a nation to have remained, it … could be one scenario producing the kind of material change in circumstances that would precipitate popular demand for a second independence referendum.“Bluntly, I believe that the groundswell of anger amongst many ordinary people in Scotland under these circumstances could produce a clamour for another independence referendum that may well be unstoppable. Of course it is open to the UK government to stop that happening, to guard against that scenario, by agreeing to the double majority provision’ - - Nicola Sturgeon warns of Scottish backlash if UK exits EuropeThere is extensive evidence from even before the EU Referendum votes were counted that the SNP would be in favour of anything that kept Scotland in the EU, should Scottish voters vote to remain.2014 - Scottish Independence Referendum held on 18th September, 20144th July, 2014A Q&A with the UK Scottish Secretary‘How are we more likely to stay in the EU in an increasingly Eurosceptic country with an imminent in-out referendum?There is no imminent in/out EU referendum’- Scottish independence referendum: Alistair Carmichael Twitter Q&A‘No imminent in/out EU Referendum’ in July 2014 came in the context of Cameron having committed to offer such a Referendum in his 2015 Manifesto back in January 2013, so a good 18 months earlier.‘David Cameron has said the British people must "have their say" on Europe as he pledged an in/out referendum if the Conservatives win the election.The prime minister said he wanted to renegotiate the UK's relationship with the EU and then give people the "simple choice" between staying in under those new terms, or leaving the EU’ - PM pledges in/out referendum on EUThe UK Government backed ‘No’ campaign used Scotland’s membership of the EU, as part of the UK, as an argument against Scottish Independence.The Conservative PM and other Conservative MPs made those statements knowing damn well that in less than a year - if Scotland voted ‘No’ and they won the 2015 General Election - that Scotland could well lose the EU Membership they were giving as a reason to vote ‘No’.From the ‘Better Together’campaign against Scottish Independence( - this is via Wayback Machine, as the website is no longer available)‘It has been apparent for years that Scotland enjoys membership of the EU because of our membership of the UK and if we no longer are members of the UK then it follows that we are no longer are part of the EU.We enjoy EU citizenship due to our UK citizenship. There is no Scottish flag flying outside the European Parliament.Scotland is not named in any EU treaty.If we are no longer part of the UK we are a candidate country - if the other members allow us to start that process.And let us not forget that the EU is a political organisation that is run by politicians. The people who will discuss a separate Scotland’s applications all have to consider their own national interests. We will not just be waved through’ - EU can’t trust themOn 18th September 2014, Scotland voted against Independence.As a Brexit bonus, these statements were also made in 2014.A Q&A with the UK Scottish Secretary‘Has the UK government made contingency plans for a yes vote?We’re working to keep the United Kingdom together. We haven’t made any contingency plans’ - - Scottish independence referendum: Alistair Carmichael Twitter Q&AFrom the ‘Better Together’campaign against Scottish Independence‘Consider this. If the person who runs a club tells you that you can’t be a member without applying, telling that person that you disagree with them doesn’t really change anything. You still can’t be a member.Wouldn’t it have been better to have sought the views of the people who make the decisions, rather than attacking them for not having the common sense to agree with the story that you yourself have cooked up to suit your own ends?Apart from anything else, attacking the people you need to have on your side in future negotiations isn’t exactly what I would call good politics’ - EU can’t trust themHaving lost, the SNP were already concerned about the Conservative pledge to hold an in/out EU Referendum and what it might mean for Scotland.The SNP proposed that all four nations should vote to leave, for the UK to leave.29th October, 2014Nicola Sturgeon’s proposal for all four nations to vote leave to leave.‘'Future membership of the EU will be a key theme in a speech Ms Sturgeon will make to the party faithful at a mass rally in Edinburgh later.She is expected to point to academic research showing that an in/out referendum on EU membership would generate a different result on either side of the border - with Scotland voting to stay in and the UK as a whole voting to exit.Ms Sturgeon reckons her proposal would give "proper protection" against any of the nations of the UK "being removed form the EU against their will" She suggested that if a referendum Bill came before the House of Commons her party would table an amendment.It would require that, for the UK to leave the EU, it would need "not just a majority across the whole UK but a majority in each one of the four nations - England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland" - Sturgeon in legal move over EU vote30th October, 2014David Cameron’s rejection of all four nations to vote leave to leave.‘He dismissed the call from first minister-in-waiting Nicola Sturgeon that Britain should only be allowed to leave if all four home nations voted in favour of the move.She claimed it was possible people in Scotland would vote No and an exit would be “disastrous” for jobs and the economy.Ms Sturgeon said the SNP’s plans would give “proper protection against any of the nations of the UK being removed from the EU against their will”.Mr Cameron has pledged to hold an in-out referendum on the issue by the end of 2017 if the Conservatives win the general election in May.Speaking in the Commons yesterday, he said: “We are one United Kingdom, there will be one in-out referendum and that will be decided on a majority of those who vote.“That is how the rules should work.” - Cameron and Sturgeon clash over EU membership | Press and Journal2015, after the Conservatives win the 2015 General Election.Now that an EU Referendum will take place, Nicola Sturgeon’s position is that she does not want Scotland to leave the EU against the will of Scottish voters. She tells Cameron that an ‘all four nations to vote leave for leave’ lock will reduce the chances of a further Scottish Independence Referendum.We know that Cameron turns this down and goes on to lose the EU Referendum vote.Cameron’s decision to do this increases the risk of the UK leaving the EU - which he said he didn’t want - increases the risk of Scotland losing EU membership - the reason he said they should reject Independence - and increases the risk of a future break-up of the UK - despite being a unionist.2nd June, 2015, Nicola Sturgeon on the EU Referendum.‘Sturgeon said: “Polls in Scotland consistently show strong support for EU membership. That is why we will propose a ‘double lock’, meaning that exit from the European Union would only be possible if all UK nations agreed. That way Scotland couldn’t be forced out of the European Union against our will.”The SNP leader added: “I previously stated my view that if Scotland were to be taken out of Europe despite voting as a nation to have remained, it would provoke a strong backlash amongst many ordinary voters.“Quite what the result of that would be no one can perceive but I’ve stated before that this could be one scenario producing the kind of material change in circumstances that would precipitate popular demand for a second independence referendum.“Bluntly, I believe that the groundswell of anger amongst many ordinary people in Scotland under these circumstances could produce a clamour for another independence referendum that may well be unstoppable. Of course it is open to the UK government to stop that happening, to guard against that scenario, by agreeing to the double majority provision.Speaking after the address, Sturgeon denied the prospect of another referendum was a threat that would be used as leverage any time there was a disagreement with UK government policy.She said: “Simply stating fact and offering a solution to a perceived problem, I don’t accept that that’s a threat. I’m trying to be constructive here and we will continue to be so, both as the bill goes through the House of Commons but [also] in the wider debate.” - Nicola Sturgeon warns of Scottish backlash if UK exits Europe

Certainly yes.I was searching for this question since many days.But not under Constitution. But under the special enactment. That special enactment is hindu marriage act 1955. Probably that right of equality under constitution makes the spouses to treat equally in Hindu Marriage Act.Section 24 and 25 do not make any difference in awarding maintenance or alimony. Because sometimes woman who had married would be having sufficient means to survive. ( GIRL belonged to RICH FAMILY).But usually it is the other way where wife claims maintenance.The award of maintenance, alimony depends on the pocket of husband or wife and the expenses of the person who receives maintenace whether it is husband or wife.Alimony is one time settlement and it covers the lifetime of spouse subject to section 25(2). Maintenance is that it is awarded every month usually but sometimes for 3 months, 6 months.But as per section 25(2) if there is any change in the circumstances like if a divorced-spouse or undivorced spouse (husband or wife ) is getting income from other source, or the person who gives maintenance is unable to give such money or spouse gets married to another person, or if a spouse needs much money because there is deterioration of health, or if a child is going for higher studies etc etc.The award of maintenance or alimony will vary.24. Maintenance pendente lite and expenses of proceedings.- Where in any proceeding under this Act it appears to the Court that either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, has no independent income sufficient for her or his support and the necessary expenses of the proceeding, it may, on the application of the wife or the husband, order the respondent to pay the petitioner the expenses of the proceeding such sum as, having regard to the petitioner's own income and the income of the respondent, it may seem to the Court to be reasonable.25. Permanent alimony and maintenance.-(1) Any court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto, on application made to it for the purposes by either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, order that the respondent shall pay to the applicant for her or his maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant as, having regard to the respondent's own income and other property of the applicant, the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case, it may seem to the Court to be just, and any such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immoveable property of the respondent.(2) If the Court is satisfied that there is a change in the circumstances of either party at any time after it has made an order under sub-section (1), it may at the instance of either party, vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just.(3) If the Court is satisfied that the party in whose favour an order has been made under this Section has re-married or, if such party is the wife, that she has not remained chaste or if such party is the husband, that he has had sexual intercourse with any woman outside wedlock, it may at the instance of the other party vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just.Special enactment or legislation are those which are meant for such group, class, community of people, SC&ST (prevention of atrocities) Act, Hindu succession act, Muslim Women ( protection of rights on divorce ) Act, Muslim women protection of rights on marriage act, POCSO ACT etc etc

A2A,,To understand the maintenance/alimony to a Hindu wife, section 25 of Hindu Marriage Act, is relevant:Section 25 in The Hindu Marriage Act, 195525 Permanent alimony and maintenance .—(1) Any court exercising jurisdiction under this Act may, at the time of passing any decree or at any time subsequent thereto, on application made to it for the purpose by either the wife or the husband, as the case may be, order that the respondent shall 55 [***] pay to the applicant for her or his maintenance and support such gross sum or such monthly or periodical sum for a term not exceeding the life of the applicant as, having regard to the respondent's own income and other property, if any, the income and other property of the applicant 56 [, the conduct of the parties and other circumstances of the case], it may seem to the court to be just, and any such payment may be secured, if necessary, by a charge on the immovable property of the respondent.(3) If the court is satisfied that there is a change in the circumstances of either party at any time after it has made an order under sub-section (1), it may at the instance of either party, vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just.(3) If the court is satisfied that the party in whose favour an order has been made under this section has re-married or, if such party is the wife, that she has not remained chaste, or, if such party is the husband, that he has had sexual intercourse with any woman outside wedlock, 57 [it may at the instance of the other party vary, modify or rescind any such order in such manner as the court may deem just].Reading sub-section 3, it is clear that if a woman is having illicit physical relations and she doesn't remain chaste, has no right to claim alimony.