SG Mehta: Let's say marriage is permitted. They adopt and then someone dies. Father and mother is LGBTQ couple - who will be treated as father and who will be mother? This is a dilemma and cannot be foreseen by your lordships.
SG Mehta: For domicile, it cannot be decided who will be the woman. For passports etc this issue will arise. Succession act provides for widow, widower, husband, wife, father,mother etc.
SG Mehta refers to provisions pertaining to succession: Please see how other provisions also become unworkable. Indian Succession act indisputably applies to all except Hindus.
SG Mehta: It opens room for several complications which my lords cannot conceive right now.
CJI DY Chandrachud: And third, you're saying that it would involve reinterpretation of personal laws because there are segments of SMA which specifically contain reference to personal laws.
CJI DY Chandrachud: You're saying the problems are-
1. It will involve substantial rewriting of legislation.
2. It may also involve the court ignoring some provisions which have been introduced as a matter of public policy- such as additional grounds for women in divorce cases.
CJI DY Chandrachud: Therefore, looking at the conspectus of these provisions perhaps we can conceptualize your arguments by saying - reinterpreting provisions of SMA will have three major problems...
SG Mehta: But if your lordships were to read "person" in place of husband or wife, one person will have right to claim maintenance from another. Meaning, in case of heterosexual marriages - husband can claim from wife.
SG Mehta: But here only the wife can get, husband is under an obligation to give her maintenance. Here, there cannot be a decision on who is the wife in same sex relationship.
SG Mehta: Right or a non-LGBT wife will be taken away because husband can also claim alimony.
Justice Kohli: But that's happening in heterosexual marriages too. We've all come across that at different times in our jurisdictions where the husband also claims.