By Danish Khan, Mumbai Mirror | Feb 28, 2014, 03.19 AM IST
An ambitious couple - an international lawyer and a paediatric anaesthetist - of Indian origin locked in a divorce battle straddling India, Singapore and the UK have collectively spent a staggering 9,00,000 pounds nearly Rs 9 crore) even though the actual divorce proceedings are yet to begin. Aloke Ray and Dr Charoo Sekhri had met in December 2008 through a dating agency in London and married in December 2009. However, differences cropped up a few months after their child was born. The judge with the family division of the London high court "begged the parties to resolve differences" to stop them from committing "financial suicide".
The tussle between the couple in the courtrooms of London revolve around Sekhri's petition for divorce, issued on August 20, 2012. Ray's contention is that the courts in England do not have the jurisdiction to entertain Sekhri's petition. In July 2013, Justice Holman ruled that the court does have jurisdiction as the couple had been legally domiciled in England for the duration of their marriage.
The tussle between the couple in the courtrooms of London revolve around Sekhri's petition for divorce, issued on August 20, 2012. Ray's contention is that the courts in England do not have the jurisdiction to entertain Sekhri's petition. In July 2013, Justice Holman ruled that the court does have jurisdiction as the couple had been legally domiciled in England for the duration of their marriage.
In the latest development, Ray's appeal against the judgment was dismissed by a three-judge bench on February 14, 2014. The battle over jurisdiction stems from the fact that a divorce in India would have fewer financial implications than in England. However, the judgement on Valentine's Day seems to have upset Ray's plans - he had filed a divorce petition in India on July 13, 2012.
Dr Sekhri went to England in July 2002 and worked as an anaesthetic registrar, while Ray was born and brought up there. Soon after they met, Ray informed Dr Sekhri of his plans to leave the UK and shifted to Singapore or Hong Kong for work. Sekhri, who was working at the Great Ormond Street Hospital in London, where she could have achieved her dream of working as a consultant, agreed to move to Singapore with him. They got married in India and in December 2010, Dr Sekhri gave birth to their child in Singapore. Less than a year later, however, the arguments and violent fights began.
In September 2012, Dr Sekhri went to England with the child, allegedly without Ray's knowledge, but had to return to Singapore following a high court order concerning wardship. Dr Sekhri's contention is that her career took a backseat when she gave birth to their son after leaving her job in London. Justice Holman, while noting that "this case is a story of human tragedy", commented that for these "highly intelligent, well educated, energetic, successful and ambitious professional people" just "under two years after a marriage with so much promise, divorce became inevitable".
Dr Sekhri went to England in July 2002 and worked as an anaesthetic registrar, while Ray was born and brought up there. Soon after they met, Ray informed Dr Sekhri of his plans to leave the UK and shifted to Singapore or Hong Kong for work. Sekhri, who was working at the Great Ormond Street Hospital in London, where she could have achieved her dream of working as a consultant, agreed to move to Singapore with him. They got married in India and in December 2010, Dr Sekhri gave birth to their child in Singapore. Less than a year later, however, the arguments and violent fights began.
In September 2012, Dr Sekhri went to England with the child, allegedly without Ray's knowledge, but had to return to Singapore following a high court order concerning wardship. Dr Sekhri's contention is that her career took a backseat when she gave birth to their son after leaving her job in London. Justice Holman, while noting that "this case is a story of human tragedy", commented that for these "highly intelligent, well educated, energetic, successful and ambitious professional people" just "under two years after a marriage with so much promise, divorce became inevitable".
The Oxford- and Cambridge-educated Ray has several properties in London and is a partner in an American law firm. "There is very little dispute about income or assets," noted Justice Holman, who "urged the parties to stand back from the fray and to focus on settling the relatively straightforward financial issues". But with the actual proceedings still to begin, the bill will only inflate. And if proceedings take place in London, also known as divorce capital of the world, it might become one of the talked-about cases in legal circles.
The estranged couple remain in Singapore. Their lawyers were unavailable for comment.
The estranged couple remain in Singapore. Their lawyers were unavailable for comment.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please let us know your comments!