SHANIJA Vs. SUDHEER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in OP No.950 of 2009 on the file of Family Court, Nedumangadu, who are the wife and minor child of the respondent, are the appellants herein, challenging the judgment and decree, for declining some of the reliefs claimed by them.

(2.) The appellants filed OP No.950 of 2009 for recovery of money, gold, movables and, also for maintenance. The Family Court granted a decree for Rs.25,000.00only as her patrimony, and all other prayers were rejected. In fact, 35 sovereigns of gold ornaments and cash worth Rs.1,50,000.00 were entrusted with the respondent/husband, and moreover, a Rado Watch worth Rs.8,000.00 and movables including a fridge worth Rs.30,000.00 were also entrusted with him. She sought maintenance @ Rs.3,000.00 for herself and Rs.2,000.00 for her child.

(3.) The respondent/husband opposed her petition contending that, she was given only 15 sovereigns of gold ornaments and patrimony of only Rs.25,000.00 from her family at the time of marriage. Her gold ornaments were never entrusted with him, and he never misused the same. He was a headload worker, and his wife did not like to stay with him, even after birth of a child. She filed MC No.264 of 2009 and obtained maintenance order under Sec. 125 of Cr.P.C. Suppressing that fact, she claimed maintenance from him in the above OP also. No movables or Rado Watch were given to him. So, he prayed for dismissal of the OP.