In an appeal against a Family Court decree ordering the return of 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments, the High Court found insufficient evidence of entrustment and misappropriation. The Court set aside the findings and dismissed the respondent's cross objection.
Findings of the Family Court set aside; appeal allowed; cross objection dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942
Mat.Appeal.No.291 OF 2014
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 1966/2013 DATED 19-122013 OF FAMILY COURT, ATTINGAL
APPELLANT:
VIJAYA KUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.GOPINATHAN, RESIDING AT NANDANA BHAVAN PATTIYARATHUMVILA, THOKKADU P.O, VARKALA.
BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE
RESPONDENT:
PRAMEELA, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.DHARGAVI, THIRUVATHIRA, KARIACHARA, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE, PALLIPPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 316
R1 BY ADV. SRI.N.R.SURESH KUMAR
THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.03.2021, ALONG WITH CO.61/2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mat.Appeal.291/2014, CO.61/2014
..2..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942
CO.No.61 OF 2014 IN Mat.Appeal. 291/2014
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN Mat.Appeal 291/2014 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER:
PRAMEELA, AGED 39 YEARS, D/O.BHAVANI, THIRUVATHIRA, KARICHARA, PALLIPPURAM VILLAGE,, PALLIPPURAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.N.R.SURESH KUMAR
RESPONDENT:
VIJAYAKUMAR, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.GOPINATHAN, RESIDING AT NANDANA BHAVAN, PATTIYARATHUMVILA, THOKKADU P.O., VARKALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE
THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.03.2021, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.291/2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mat.Appeal.291/2014, CO.61/2014
..3..
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of March 2021
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J
This matter relates to the recovery of Gold ornaments and money claimed by the former wife of the appellant.
Mat.Appeal.291/2014, CO.61/2014
has been filed. In this appeal, the respondent also filed a cross objection to the extent dissatisfied with the decree declining her claim.
parties.
Mat.Appeal.291/2014, CO.61/2014
..5..
Mat.Appeal.291/2014, CO.61/2014
..6..
misappropriation. Merely because the appellant had admitted that she adorned Twenty and half sovereigns of Gold ornaments at the time of marriage, that itself will not be sufficient to prove that those ornaments were entrusted with the appellant and he later misappropriated it.
In such circumstances, we are of the view that the impugned findings are liable to be interfered with. Accordingly, we set aside the findings and allow this appeal. In the light of discussion as above, we also dismiss the cross objection filed by the respondent.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
JUDGE
Sd/-
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
JUDGE
PR
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the appellant is liable to return gold ornaments claimed by the respondent based on admission of adornment.
VIJAYA KUMAR
PRAMEELA
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
