(1.) Respondents in O.P.No.1328/2013 on the files of the Family Court, Chavara are the appellants herein, challenging judgment and decree. The 1st respondent herein is the wife and the 2 nd respondent is the daughter of the 1st appellant herein. The 2nd appellant is the mother of the 1st appellant.
(2.) The original petition was instituted by the respondents herein seeking for declaration of absolute title of the 1 st respondent in the petition schedule property as well as for return of 9 sovereigns of gold ornaments or its value to the tune of Rs.2,01,600/- along with an amount of Rs.35,000/- towards value of the movable articles, with 6% interest. The appellants remained ex-parte in the proceedings. The 1st respondent filed proof affidavit and marked Exts.A1 and A2 documents. The court below after appreciating the evidence adduced through the proof affidavit and on considering the documents marked, decreed the original petition in part. The claim of the respondents to declare exclusive title of the 1st respondent on the petition schedule property was declined on finding that the recitals in the document would indicate that the consideration for purchase of the said property to third party was passed both from the 1 st appellant and the 1st respondent. The court below found that the respondents herein could not able to prove in any manner that the entire sale consideration was paid by the 1st respondent alone. The remaining claim in the original petition for recovery of 9 sovereigns of gold ornaments or its market value at Rs.2,01,600/- and recovery of a sum of Rs.35,000/- towards value of the household articles along with interest, was allowed.
(3.) It is contended on behalf of the appellants that the court below had allowed the original petition in part without properly appreciating the materials and evidence available on record. Learned counsel for the appellants also contended that, there is no proper discussions in the impugned judgment with respect to the merits of the claims made by the respondents.