Six anonymised case studies.

The matter

Two professionals in their late thirties, both previously married, both with children from earlier marriages. The new marriage was a year away. The conversation about money and inheritance had not happened. Both sides of the family expected something put on paper.

The track chosen

Prenup, bilateral builder. Both partners filled their half of the draft from separate sessions. The conversation around streedhan, ancestral property, and inheritance for prior-marriage children was surfaced by the drafting tool, not avoided.

What happened

Over 6 weeks: a joint drafting session, two revision rounds with an empanelled advocate, and a final clean copy. The disagreement was on inheritance treatment for the older child of one partner; the platform flagged it as a disputed clause and held the conversation open until both partners agreed.

Outcome

Final agreement executed and registered in Mumbai before the wedding. Both families received a sealed copy. No legal escalation since.

The matter

Same-sex couple, one Indian citizen in Bangalore, one Canadian citizen. Already cohabiting between the two cities for two years. Wanted a written record before deepening financial entanglement. Marriage was on the table in Canada but not legally available in India.

The track chosen

Layered cohabitation agreement. PWDV-aware in India (relationship in the nature of marriage is recognised under PWDV regardless of the partners' sexes for civil-protection purposes), with a parallel Canadian common-law cohabitation clause. Coordination with Partlee's Toronto-empanelled counsel.

What happened

Drafted in 4 weeks. The Canadian side was the registrable instrument; the Indian side was the disclosure-and-asset record. Spousal-visa coordination was added when the couple later applied for the Canadian partner to obtain an Indian dependent visa.

Outcome

Cohabitation formalised. The Indian-resident partner's family was informed (both families were briefed by the couple privately; Partlee facilitated only the drafting). Spousal-visa application currently in process.

The matter

Both partners in their forties, eighteen years of marriage, two teenage children, both careers demanding. They had stopped talking about anything that wasn't logistics. One partner had quietly consulted a divorce lawyer; the other did not know. The unspoken question on both sides was whether they were still choosing each other.

The track chosen

Two-night, three-day mediation retreat at a partner property. Three guided sessions with an empanelled mediator, large stretches of quiet between them, soundproofed conversation rooms, mediator-trained staff.

What happened

Day one: the consultation that had been concealed was disclosed. Difficult. Day two: a working through of the practical erosion - careers, children, in-laws, intimacy. Day three: a written joint memo of what they had agreed about how they wanted to live for the next year, with a six-month check-in scheduled.

Outcome

No divorce filed. Couple chose to continue with a renegotiated arrangement. Partlee Subscriptions was added at the six-month check-in to keep the conversation moving.

The matter

Couple in their early thirties, four years married, no children. Both had concluded - separately and then together - that the marriage was not viable. Both wanted to handle the matter without it becoming an item in either of their workplaces or families' conversations.

The track chosen

§13B mutual consent track, with full anonymised matter code. Empanelled boutique firm in Pune carried the file; Partlee coordinated the timeline and updates.

What happened

MoU drafted in three weeks. Joint petition filed; first motion held; six-month statutory waiting period observed; second motion held; decree issued. Total elapsed: 7 months. Both partners attended via video-link for one motion and in person for the other.

Outcome

Decree of divorce by mutual consent. Property settled per the MoU. Both partners' workplaces were unaware of the matter throughout.

The matter

Married eleven years, two minor children, one partner had been increasingly controlling and, in the past year, intermittently violent. The partner who wanted to leave was the financial dependent. Family was unsupportive. A §498A complaint had been filed two months prior.

The track chosen

Contested track (§13 on cruelty grounds), with the DV add-on. Priority Safety Support routed the matter to a senior counsel within 4 working days. PWDV protective order applied for in parallel.

What happened

Protection order granted within 6 weeks. Interim maintenance granted. Custody of the minor children kept with the non-violent partner pending hearing. Divorce proceedings ongoing.

Outcome

Safety established. Financial floor established. Custody contested but interim arrangement is stable. Matter continues.

The matter

Couple in their late thirties, both NRIs in Dubai, original Hindu marriage solemnised in Mumbai twelve years earlier. Mutual decision to divorce. The wife's UAE residence visa was a dependent visa tied to the marriage. Status conversion was urgent.

The track chosen

§13B mutual consent in India (because the marriage was Indian and Hindu Marriage Act applied), with the cross-border + spousal-visa add-ons. Coordination with Partlee's UAE-empanelled counsel for the visa status change.

What happened

Both partners appeared by video-link for the motions. Decree obtained in India in 8 months. Apostille and decree-recognition chain handled. UAE residence visa converted to an employer-sponsored work visa via the empanelled UAE counsel, in parallel.

Outcome

Divorce decree obtained. Wife's UAE residence preserved through her employer. Property held in India settled per the MoU before second motion.