VINOD Vs. SOUMYA
LAWS(KER)-2022-1-272
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on January 14,2022

VINOD Appellant
VERSUS
SOUMYA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

WILLIAM DAVID VS. LINU MARY GEORGE [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

SOPHY THOMAS, J. - (1.)The appellants herein are the respondents in O.P.No.1806 of 2011 on the file of Family Court, Nedumangad. The respondent/wife filed that O.P. for recovery of gold ornaments and movables entrusted with the appellants and also to get back the documents of her property, which was given as security for a loan availed by the 3rd appellant-mother-in-law.
(2.)The 1st appellant husband had filed O.P.No.688 of 2011 for dissolving his marriage with the respondent. That O.P. was tried jointly with O.P.No.1806 of 2011 and a common judgment was passed on 25/6/2013 granting a decree of divorce in O.P.No.688 of 2011 in favour of the 1st appellant, and partly allowing O.P.No.1806 of 2011 directing the appellants to return 130 sovereigns of gold ornaments to the respondent-wife, or to pay its market value as on the date of realization, and to return the original title documents of the respondent to her after discharging the liability of the 3rd appellant with KSFE, Vellarada Branch. Aggrieved by the judgment and decree in O.P.No.1806 of 2011, this appeal has been preferred by the respondents therein.
(3.)The case put forward by the respondent/wife in O.P.No.1806 of 2011 was that she was given 130 sovereigns of gold ornaments, movables worth Rs.50,000.00 and also landed property extending 91.99 Ares with a two storied building, as her paternal share, at the time of marriage. After 2 weeks of marriage, her entire gold ornaments were received by appellants 1 and 2 i.e., her husband and father-in-law. According to her, they were in the habit of pledging and redeeming her gold ornaments. When she had to attend some functions, they used to give some of her ornaments, but immediately after attending the function, they used to get it back from her. The movables/household articles worth Rs.50,000.00 given from her family were also entrusted with the appellants. In order to secure a loan availed by the 3rd appellant from KSFE, Vellarada Branch, the title deeds of the respondent were given as security, and she wanted to get back those documents, on clearing the loan liability by the 3rd appellant.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.