SHYLA BEEVI Vs. ABDUL KALAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal arises from the judgment of the Family Court, Nedumangad in O.P.No.176 of 2007 filed by appellants against respondent for return of 20 sovereigns or Rs.1,25,000/- being its equivalent value, to recover Rs.3,00,000/- advanced by first appellant's father to respondent and for past maintenance at the rate of Rs.2000/- for each of the appellants for 30 months. The above O.P was tried along with O.P.Nos. 392 of 2006 and 345 of 2007, which were filed by respondent husband. By a common judgment rendered on 3.10.2009, OP Nos.392 of 2006 and 176 of 2007 were dismissed and O.P.345 of 2007 was partly decreed. It is aggrieved by the judgment in O.P.No.176 of 2007, appellants who filed the O.P, have filed this appeal.

(2.) THE marriage between first appellant and respondent was solemnized on 24.8.1997. Appellants 2 and 3 were born in that wedlock. The case of first appellant is that at the time of her marriage, her father had given her 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments and that the gold ornaments were sold by respondent and along with the sale proceeds and utilizing Rs.3,00,000/- given by her father, he purchased 18 cents of land where the appellants are now residing. It is her case that her father got Rs.3,00,000/- by selling her share of his family property. It is on this basis, appellants claimed recovery of 20 sovereigns of gold and Rs.3,00,000/-.

(3.) HOWEVER , the judgment shows that while negativing the case of appellants, Family Court lost sight of the admission made by husband, that at the time of marriage, wife had 20 sovereigns of gold in total and according to him, out of the 20 sovereigns, 15 sovereigns were contributed by him. This case of the respondent was disbelieved by Family Court, while considering the issue No.1 in O.P.No.392 of 2006 and the relevant part of the judgment reads thus:-