MUHAMMED SHAJI Vs. REMSINA MOL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant as well as the revision petitioner is the 1st respondent in O.P.No.661/2009, and M.C.573/2009 and the petitioner in O.P.No.895/2009 of the family court, Malappuram. He is the husband of the petitioner in O.P.661/2009 and M.C.573/2009. O.P.895/2009 was filed by the appellant herein against the respondent seeking custody of the minor child under Section 7 of the Guardian and Wards Act, 1890. O.P.661/2009 was filed by the respondent in the above appeals seeking a decree for return of money, gold ornaments and household articles or its value. M.C.573/2009 was filed by the respondent in the revision petition against the revision petitioner seeking maintenance allowance to her and the child. After considering the objections filed by the respective respondent in each case, the family court dismissed O.P.895/2009 and allowed O.P.661/2009 and M.C.573/2009, by a common judgment. These appeals and revision petition are filed against the said common judgment by the husband as he is the aggrieved party in all the aforesaid proceedings.

(2.) The averments in OP 661/2009 can be summarized as follows: (The parties are referred to as in the original petition).

(3.) On the aforesaid pleadings, both parties adduced evidence and after considering the evidence on record, the family court allowed the original petition No.661/2009 and passed decree for return of 100 sovereigns of gold ornaments or Rs 11, 12, 000/- as the value of the said ornaments with interest at the rate of 9% per annum. But the family court rejected the claim for return of household articles or its value. Thus the original petition was allowed in part only. The findings whereby the family court allowed the original petition and passed the decree are challenged in this appeal.