SHAMEEMA Vs. MOHAMED ASKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant/wife has preferred this appeal against the rejection of her claim for return of an amount of Rs. 4,05,000/- which the respondent/her husband was allegedly liable to return to her.

(2.) That the parties are spouses is not disputed. The marriage took place on 4/7/93. Three children were born in the wed-lock and the spouses were together till 9/5/03 on which day separate residence commenced. It is the case of the appellant that 60 sovereigns of gold ornaments which were valued at Rs. 2,40,000/- on the date of the petition were worn by the appellant when she came to the matrimonial home after marriage. It is her case that these ornaments were misappropriated by the husband. According to her, when she went for the delivery of the first child, some of these ornaments were given to her; but they were also taken after she reached her parental home. The appellant/wife contended that on 9/5/03 when she returned from the matrimonial home, the entire quantity of 60 sovereigns of gold ornaments were at her matrimonial home. In addition to this, according to her, an amount of Rs. 1 lakh was paid as consideration at the time of the marriage. Later, when the husband shifted to a new house, Rs. 50,000/- was paid for purchase of furniture in the new house and household articles worth Rs. 15,000/- were handed over to the husband. It is thus that she claimed a total amount of Rs. 4,05,000/- (Rs. 2,40,000/- + Rs. 1,00,000/- + Rs. 15,000/- + Rs. 50,000/-).

(3.) The respondent/husband entered appearance and resisted the claim. According to him, no amount of Rs. 1 lakh or Rs. 50,000/- were handed over at the time of marriage or at the time of the house warming ceremony. Household articles were not given. He did not admit that the wife was having 60 sovereigns of gold ornaments. He, however, asserted that whatever gold ornaments she had had been taken back by her and no ornament belonging to her was available with him.