'What was intended under Sect 2(a) of the Act was a relationship of the same nature as marriage and nothing more', Justice K Harilal said in his order yesterday while dismissing a petition filed by a man hailing from Cherthala in Alapuzha district against a complaint from his live-in partner seeking protection from domestic violence and compensation.
According to Justice Harilal, "The couple must have lived together akin to spouses. That alone is sufficient. The legislature intent of the Act itself is to give protection to the women who were living with the husband in the nature of a marriage without a legal marriage."
The Supreme Court has also specially stated they must have attained legal age of marriage and they must have lived together as spouses for a significant period of time, the court pointed out.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
