SHARAFUDHEEN Vs. JASNA BEEGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mat. Appeal is filed by the respondents in O.P. No. 657/2010. The connected R.P. (F.C.) No. 152/2011 is filed by the sole respondent in M.C. No. 712/2010 on the file of the Family Court, Malappuram. O.P. No. 657/2010 was filed by the wife against the husband and father-in-law for realisation of Rs. 3 lakhs and 70 sovereigns of gold ornaments or their market price with interest and cost. M.C. is filed by the wife for maintenance at the rate of Rs. 10,000/- to her and Rs. 5,000/- to the minor son. The Family Court by a common order allowed the Original Petition directing the respondents 1 and 2 therein to return 70 sovereigns of gold ornaments or its value and currency of Rs. 3 lakhs with interest at the rate of 9% p.a. from the date of filing of the Original Petition. The M.C. also was Mat. Appeal No. 530/2011 & R.P. (F.C.) No. 152/2011 allowed in part directing the respondent to pay maintenance at the rate of Rs. 4,000/- to the 1st petitioner and Rs. 1000/- to the 2nd petitioner as monthly maintenance. The appeal and revision petition are filed challenging the common order. The parties are hereinafter referred to as referred in the Original Petition.

(2.) Both sides adduced oral and documentary evidence. PW1 to PW3 were examined on the side of the petitioner and RW1 to RW3 on the side of the respondents. Exts. A1 to A4 (a) were marked on the side of the petitioner and B1 to B5 were marked on the side of the respondents.

(3.) The petitioner and 1st respondent are husband and wife. A male child was born in the wedlock. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 30.4.2008. According to the petitioner, 75 sovereigns of gold ornaments and currency of Rs. 3 lakhs were given by her father at the time of marriage. The gold and money were entrusted with the respondents. The money and ornaments were fixed after negotiations before marriage. It is stated in the Original Petition that 75 sovereigns of gold ornaments and currency of Rs. 4 lakhs were fixed for the marriage. But her father could arrange only 75 sovereigns and currency of Rs. 3 lakhs by sale of the house and landed property. According to the petitioner, 70 sovereigns of gold, out of the 75 sovereigns of gold ornaments, were given to her at the time of marriage and Rs. 3 lakhs were misappropriated by the respondents. It is also alleged that out of her 75 sovereigns of gold ornaments, 50 sovereigns of gold ornaments were utilised by the husband's family for the marriage of the husband's sister, who was also examined in this case as RW3. The balance 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments were taken by the husband.