P G RAPHEAL Vs. SALYKUTTY JOSEPH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is the ex-husband of the respondent. The lady filed two original petitions before the family court. One was for divorce. The other one was for return of money and gold ornaments. The relief of divorce was decreed by the family court. The appellant did not appeal against the said decree. The family court allowed the claim for gold ornaments. But it disallowed the claim for money. The respondent did not appeal against the denial of her claim for money. The appellant is in appeal against the decree directing him to pay the value of gold ornaments.

(2.) The case of the respondent goes as follows : She was married to the appellant. The marriage was solemnized on 28.4.1994. They lived as man and wife in the house of the appellant. A baby girl was born in the wedlock. An amount of Rs 1, 00, 000/- was paid to the appellant in connection with the marriage. The respondent as the bride wore 25 sovereigns of gold ornaments. Out of the same, the appellant appropriated 25 sovereigns of gold ornaments on different occasions for his needs. He appropriated the amount of Rs 1, 00, 000/- also for himself.

(3.) The appellant filed written-statement. He admitted the marriage. He admitted the birth of the child. He raised the following contentions : The entire claim of the respondent is barred by the law of limitation. The allegation that the appellant was paid Rs 1, 00, 000/- in connection with the marriage and the further contention that 22.5 sovereigns of gold ornaments were appropriated by the appellant are incorrect. Whatever money and ornaments the respondent had in connection with her marriage had been returned to her by the appellant. Therefore the respondent is not entitled to raise any further claim.