ANIL KUMAR Vs. JYOTI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) JUDGEMENT :- This appeal has been filed against the Judgement of the learned District Judge. Bikaner dated 4-8-1986 whereby the learned lower Court has ordered that 21 sarees, 2 quilts, two Gaddas, 12 bed-sheets, one Godrej Friz. Steel Utensils. Steel Almirah, one Sofa, one Central Table, one Watch, one Washing machine, one double-bed, two tea sets, oven and various gifts amounting to Rs. 10,000/-, one golden set weighing 5 tolas, another golden set weighing 3 tolas, two Kadas weighing 4 tolas, one ring weighing one tola and another ring weighing 10 grams, and one chain weighing 1 tolas be returned to the wife-respondent after obtaining a receipt as they exclusively belonged to her. The learned lower Court has also passed a decree for dissolution of the marriage but that finding or decree has not been challenged by the husband-appellant in this appeal. The husband-appellant has only challenged the finding of the learned lower Court regarding delivery of the abovesaid properties to the wife-respondent.

(2.) On 12-11-1986, learned counsel appearing for the parties requested that this appeal may be heard and decided on merits at the admission stage.

(3.) Mr. Mridul Jain, learned counsel appearing for the husband-appellant has argued that S.27 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') provides that in a proceeding under this Act, the Court may make such provision in the decree as it deems just and proper with respect to any property presented, at or about the time of marriage. which may belong jointly to both the husband and the wife. According to him. S.27 of the Act does not authorise the Court to order for the delivery of the property in the proceedings under this Act which exclusively belongs to any one of the spouses. The Court can only pass orders about the delivery of her (wife) apportioned share of the gift which are jointly owned by the husband and the wife and which have been given to them at or about the time of the marriage. In support of this argument, he has placed reliance on a Division Bench decision of the Gujarat High Court in Suryakant v. Jashumati, 1981 Hindu LR 473, wherein it has been held as under :