JOYKUTTY Vs. ELAMMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two appeals arise from a common order in O.P.145/2006 and 786/2008 of the Family Court, Kottarakkara. The husband is the appellant in both the cases. O.P.786/2008 was filed by the appellant/husband seeking divorce on the ground of adultery and cruelty. His allegation was that respondent/wife was having a relationship with her brother-in-law. But apparently he was not made a party to the case. The Family Court found that since the adulterer was not made a party, case of adultery cannot be considered. With regard to allegation of cruelty, it was found that the petitioner/appellant had made false allegations without substantiating the same and therefore he is not entitiled for getting a decree for divorce on the ground of cruelty as well.

(2.) O.P.145/2006 has been filed by the 1st respondent/wife claiming return of money and gold ornaments from the appellant/1st respondent in the said O.P. The other respondents were his sister, nephew and the 3rd party. Contention urged by the petitioner/wife was that at the time of marriage, her parents had given her 1.5 acres of rubber plantation and 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments. The property given to her was sold in the year 1992 for an amount of Rs 5,00,000/- and the money was utilised for constructing a house in the property belonging to her husband. The gold ornaments given to her were also appropriated by her husband. Since matrimonial issues had arisen between the parties, she sought for return of gold ornaments and Rs 5,00,000/-. She also sought for a permanent prohibitory injunction against the respondents from evicting her from the petition schedule property. She also contended that her husband had sold certain item of property.

(3.) Separate evidence was taken in both the cases. In O.P.145/2006 on the side of the petitioners PW1 to 3 were examined and DW1 to 4 were examined on the side of the respondents. Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the petitioner and Exts.B1 to B8 on the side of the respondents. In O.P.786/2008, on the side of the petitioner two witnesses were examined as PW1 and PW2 and respondent was examined as DW1. Exts.A1 to A4 were marked on the side of the petitioner. The cases were heard together and decided by a common judgment.