SREEJA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioners were the petitioners in CMP No.5122 of 2008 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattakada, seeking to get appropriate relief under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act , 2005. By its order dated 29.12.2008, the learned magistrate directed respondents 2 to 4 herein, who were respondents 1 to 3 in the CMP, to return 45 sovereigns of gold ornaments to the revision petitioners within a period of one month from the date of the order. The 3rd respondent/2nd respondent was directed to transfer ten cents of land comprised in Sy.No.409/16-1, which is in the name of the 3rd respondent/2nd respondent to the 2nd revision petitioner/2nd petitioner within a period of one month from the date of the order and in the event of failure, the 3rd respondent/2nd respondent was directed to execute conveyance in favour of the 2nd revision petitioner/2nd petitioner. The 4th respondent herein, who was the 3rd respondent in the CMP, and respondents 2 and 3 herein, who were respondents 1 and 2 in the CMP, preferred Crl.Appeal Nos.75 of 2009 and 76 of 2009 respectively before the Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram, challenging the order in CMP No.5122 of 2008. By its common judgment dated 10.08.2009, both the appeals were allowed, wherein the order of the trial court directing the 3rd respondent/2nd respondent in CMP to execute a conveyance deed in respect of 10 cents of property covered by Exts.P3 and P5 documents in favour of the 2 nd revision petitioner/2nd petitioner in CMP is set aside without prejudice to the right of the aggrieved person to get her remedy through the civil court. Feeling aggrieved, the revision petitioners/petitioners in CMP are before this Court.

(2.) The parties are hereinafter referred to as the petitioners and respondents according to their status in the trial court unless otherwise stated.

(3.) Respondents 1 and 2 are the father in law and mother in law of the 1st petitioner respectively. The 3rd respondent is the son in law of respondents 1 and 2. The marriage between the 1st petitioner and the son of respondents 1 and 2 was solemnized on 17.08.2003. On 17.08.2007, the husband of the 1st petitioner died of cancer. In connection with his treatment, it is alleged that, respondents 1 and 2 received an amount of Rs.4,00,000/- and 60 sovereigns of gold ornaments from the aggrieved. The 2nd respondent executed a settlement deed No.296/07 dated 19.01.2007 of the Sub Registry, Malayinkeezhu in favour of her son, Shibumon. On 10.12.2006, the right hand of Shibumon was amputated due to cancer at the Regional Cancer Centre, Thiruvananthapuram. Thereafter, respondents 1 to 3 fabricated a sale deed in favour of the 2nd respondent on 17.03.2007 as per sale deed No.1221/2007 of the Malayinkeezhu Sub Registry Office. It is alleged that after the death of the 1 st petitioner's husband on 17.08.2007, both the petitioners were forcibly evicted from the matrimonial home. It is further alleged that household articles and other valuable gifts, which were entrusted to the respondents at the time of marriage, are still under the custody of respondents 1 to 3. Hence, CMP No.5122 of 2008 was filed before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kattakada, to return the gold ornaments and also to get the sale deed executed in favour of the 2nd respondent set aside.