Posted:
Sanju bechara innocent hai har baar armaan ke hatthe char jata haithey have fake degrees lol
their law firm is just a front lol Sanju is doing some shady stuff lol
Sanju bechara innocent hai har baar armaan ke hatthe char jata haithey have fake degrees lol
Easier said than done ki one should have no Fs to give about egotistical matriarch etc. but when the man she loves has a full family and she is in a place where she is watching him pick her over them knowing it hurts him, knowing how much he loves his entire family including that egotistical matriarch- she can't not feel guilty or sad.
She seeks the blessings of an elder - yes. But thats not a free pass to do/say anything that elder pleases and when kaveri suggests something that is insulting to her- she speaks up.
I find it perfectly reasonable.
The answer is right there in your post.Home maker is the word we used to say about the woman who take care of home without working anywhere else.That means Home maker has the equal share of all the responsibilities of the family.Then how come it's just her husband and his family feeding her,she also doing equal work in take care of her house,then she is also feeding them.She is a family member then She has all the rights speak against any wrong happening to her or against anyone in the family infront of her.If an Indian citizen can question Government who are administrators of this country,why couldnt a woman speak up against her in-laws just because she is not contributing FINANCIALLy to the family?
When Indian law allows a wife to ask for ailmony from a husband after divorce,why can't a bahu,who is still a family member depend her husband's family financially and question any wrong happening in that family?And also supreme court also said a husband has the responsibility to provide a wife money if she is not financially independent.And also my mom and granny always say everyone have right on food.There shouldn't be any talks like it's from someone's money etcetc
I wrote this post in context of law because all these laws are made by people who is more intelligent and have much better sense than the people in this forum.
And also about Abhira,even if she is not living there by her money ,who is her husband /soon to be husband?Armaan poddar whom as declared as the most successful lawyer in the poddar firm.Most of the poddar's cash ryt now coming from his hardwork.She is eating from his money,not that family's money or dadisa's money (if she isn't managing her expenses),so that she should oblige to do anything as per dadisa says.its poddar family eat from money which mostly coming from Armaan .Right now there isn't anything like Armaan Abhira are arguing.He can also question dadisa for abhira ryt now.So there is nt any question that she is going against that family after depending them.
husbands should share financial resources with their 'homemaker' wives who did not have an independent source of income to empower them
Agree with your points but there are many parts of India ( yes I am talkjng about cities and not villages), there is a strong culture of listening and respecting on laws even when they are obviously not understanding to new age demands, I am not talking about any physical abuse but verbal and emotional abuse. Have seen first hand.
I dunno what day , age and parts of India we are talking about ..coz modern India is changing fast..this issue of dependency on in laws and the husband stems mainly from socio economic condition of the girls ..it's changing fast as the girls are getting educated & financially independent ..even in remote areas when I visit , I see women of the household taking care of the small businesses and shops which is revolutionary in itself ..
Oppression however still remains an issue ..but with changing scenario , the parents Never insist on taking any crap in sasural..if the couple is not compatible, separation is an easy way out....problem arises when there isn't any issue with the husband but with the in laws & husband is not ready to move out , or it's not an option for many ..
I'm sorry but even the concept of families shown on itv is outdated . In the cities which they base their stories on , udaipur and all, they are not villages , they r modern cities .
In the first place If someone is reminded or think herself she cant say anything because that family is feeding her that itself is fundamentally a wrong start of the relationship. It s not a marriage then, its not a bahu but a maid in the sasural.
secondly not saying your family (in this case husband or in-laws) that they are wrong is never healthy situation, as you are indulging their wrongdoing many times. One should expected to be called out and call out themselves if things are wrong. If that's not happening there is no "rishta" there.
Itv tries to show sometime that the ML and FL are calling out wrongdoing, but they fail miserably with the elders in the house in the name of a thing called age (bujurg).
That is pathetic in my opinion and that is the part when I left the series for some days.
This paper shows Kaveri has no faith in abhira kyunki aise papers usne Manisha, vidya or Ruhi’s sign nahi karwaya hai.
Abhira ne uske baare mai aisa sochne ki wajah bhi di hai by saying woh Poddar firm ko hilla kar rakh degi when she was in outhouse as Armaan’s gf. She has no gratitude as a gf ki usko muft mai rehne ko outhouse mila, khana pina sab kharcha poddars utha rahe the Armaan ki gf ka!
Jab ap ke mann mai ap ko jo bhi muft mai mila hai uske liye gratitude zero dikhai de tab aise self righteous attitude wale logo par bharosa karna mushkil ho jata hai ki kal ko woh apne self righteous attitude ke chalte hissa le kar uss hisse ko kisi ko daan bhi kar sakte hai, rivals ko bhi de sakte hai after all yeh sab dusro ke khoon pasine se bana se, apne pasine se thodi bana hai.
Originally posted by: firewings_diya
irrespective of what could be the reason. She need not insult the already built firm. Madhav was raised with same money which was earned in that firm. If in a company a employee commits fraud then we can not say company is fraud or owner is fraud. Insulting the firm would indirectly insult dadaji of ar. She need not say that. she could have said something like i will be a successful lawyer and someday I will make you proud of me.
Everything lies in how a person conveys. So yeah that's all i wanted to say
If an employee commits fraud or anything, depending on the case Employer too is liable.
So the employer doesn't gets free pass for the fraud did by the employee.
if the fraud happened within the company yes but if employee does something in his free time then he is responsible for that. In this case dadisa and phuphasa did something outside their firm.Originally posted by: Palak2812
If an employee commits fraud or anything, depending on the case Employer too is liable.
So the employer doesn't gets free pass for the fraud did by the employee.
comment:
p_commentcount