SUDHA SUHAS NANDANVANKAR Vs. SUHAS RAMRAO NANDANVANKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the Judgment and order passed in Misc. Application No. 60 of 2000 on 05. 08. 2000 by the Family court, Bandra in an application preferred under Sections 27 and 25 of the hindu Marriage Act, inter alia, making prayer that the stridhan of the applicant be returned and also permanent alimony be granted. The said application was partly allowed by the Family court. However, in respect of part rejection of the application, this appeal has been preferred.

(2.) THE applicant was married with the opponent on 21. 5. 1995 according to Hindu Laws. The said marriage has been annulled by a decree of nullity dated 16. 3. 1996 on a ground that the applicant-wife was suffering from epilepsy at the time of marriage. Even though the said decree was ex-parte? the said decree was not challenged by the applicant-wife. However, after passing of the said decree, the notice was issued by the applicant for return of the articles which were presented to her at the time of marriage by her parents as per the list. It is further claimed that the expenses incurred for the said marriage of Rs. 31,876/- be returned. During the pendency of this application the applicant-wife further submitted the application (Exh. 16) for return of the articles and jewellery which was presented to her by her in laws at the time of marriage. She has further claimed permanent alimony. The Family court has rejected the claim of rs. 31,876/- which was incurred by the parents of the app1icant-wife for the purposes of marriage expenses on the ground that there is no provision to return such amount. At the time of argument of this matter, the learned Counsel for the appellant wife fairly conceded that there is no provision for return of such marriage expenses and therefore, unless there is a provision to that effect, the trial court was justified in rejecting the claim for the marriange expenses to the extent of Rs. 31,876/ -. The trial court has also rejected the claim in respect of the golden articles and jewellery as listed in (Exh. 16 ). This appeal is mainly directed against the said finding of the trial court. We need not go to list of those articles but what we find that all these articles, as per the claim made by the applicant-wife, have been presented to her by the inlaws viz. mother-in-law, sister in law i. e. (sister of the husband), another sistei in-law i. e. the wife of the brother of the husband and so on. Naturally, as these articles have been presented by the in-laws, the applicant has not produced any evidence to demonstrate that these articles were purchased by her inlaws at any point of time. However, she had entered into witness box and stated that these articles were presented to her. In order to support her testimony, she has produced the photographs which were taken at the time of marriage wherein these articles were reflected as having been put on her and thereby claiming that these articles were with her and they have not been returned by the husband. Since they found to be stridhan, she is entitled to return of the same. The husband has denied that such articles were ever presented to the applicant-wife. According to him these articles were not presented at any point of time and he further made a suggestion in the cross-examination that these articles were of the parents of the appellant-wife which were put on by her parents in order to have a show of the presentation of such articles and he calls it as a "mandap show". Such suggestion has been denied by the applicant-wife. However, it is pertinent to note that if these articles were presented to her, she should have examined some witnesses who were present at the time of marriage in the presence of whom these articles were presented by her inlaws. However, she has not examined her father and mother. She has not examined any friend who may be accompanied her at the time of said marriage ceremony to demonstrate that such articles were presented during the marriage ceremony to her. As against this, what we have noticed that the respondent-husband has entered into witness box to depose that such articles were not presented. Apart from that respondent-husband has examined his parents. The parents have also stated that such articles were not presented to the appellant-wife and therefore, the respondent has brought on record the primary evidence to demonstrate that such articles were never presented. Learned Counsel for the applicant tried to submit that since these articles will have to be returned to the appellant-wife, the respondent and his parents are making statements that such articles were not presented. However, what we find that in that eventuality, these witnesses have been cross-examined and nothing have been brought in the cross examination to demonstrate that these witnesses were supressing the truth. We have gone through the evidence of the parents and noticed that the evidence is convincing one and the trial court has rightly appreciated the evidence. Therefore, we find that appellant has failed to establish that such articles were presented by her inlaws in the marriage ceremony.

(3.) APART from this, we have taken into consideration that when the first notice was given the articles mentioned in the list Exh. 16 were not demanded. Not only that when the application was filed, in the said application there was no demand for the articles. It is during the pendency of the application, the Exh. 16 was submitted to the Family court making claim towards specific articles. Those articles were golden and jewellery articles and such important stridhan will not be forgotten by the appellant-wife till the pendency of the application. In that context it is reflected that it is a after thought decision to claim the articles and we find that the observation and finding recorded by the family court are proper and justified one and we find that there is no merit in the submission of the learned Counsel that the Family court should have allowed the list (Exh. 16 ).