It is the law of universal partnership which is being applied here. The judge purely pointed out that staying with a woman (or man), begetting children, and living as man and wife will qualify a couple as being married and that the issues of mungal sutra and other ceremonial marriage issues are religious and will have no impact on the legal interpretation of a married couple. Offcourse if the man is already married for example then no sane judge will proclaim his relationship with another woman to be a marriage in law. Maintenance is payable to illegitimate children by a father. The issue of concern here would be other entitlements such as pension and division of estate when one of the parties die. If a man lived with a woman, had children with her and then pushed off to marry another woman by religious and civil rites with whom he has further children without the consent of the first woman, and he dies thereafter, the second "wife" may find herself and her children left without the benefit of the man's pension and property. Therefore guys, when in India beware where you test your dipsticks
and in the process will pay .
