JUDGMENT - GOKHALE H.L., J.: - This Family Court Appeal by the appellant wife seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 11th June, 2001 passed by a learned Judge of the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai in Misc. Application No. 47 of 1998 rejecting the same. The Misc. Application decided by the Family Court arose as a result of a remand to that Court by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide its order dated 4th September, 1997 passed in Civil Appeal No. 126 of 1993 directing the Family Court to decide the limited issue with respect to the claim made by the appellant wife under section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 concerning the return of ornaments and other articles. This judgment of the Apex Court is in the case of (Balkrishna Kadam v. Sangeeta Kadam)1, is reported in 1998(1) Bom.C.R. (S.C.)462. These ornaments and articles were claimed by the appellant in her written statement to M.J. Petition No. 662 of 1982 filed by the respondent-husband seeking divorce.

2. The short facts leading to this appeal are as follows: -

The appellant and the respondent were married on 11th May. 1969 as per the Hindu Vedic Rites in Mumbai. It appears that within a few months after the marriage, disputes developed between the parties on various aspects. However, to put it shortly, initially the disputes appear to have started because of the appellant wife and her mother-in- law not getting along well with each other. Whereas it is the case of the appellant wife that the mother-in-law did not treat her well and that the respondent husband and the mother-in-law used to ill treat, abuse and assault the appellant. On the other hand, it was the case of the respondent-husband that it was the appellant-wife who ill treated her mother-in-law. It also appears that the accommodation, wherein the parties lived initially at Ghodapdev in Central Mumbai, was a very small one. The parties later on shifted to an apartment at Santacruz and, though the same was in the name of the respondent husband, there is a controversy as to who made the principal contribution towards the purchase of the flat. The grievance of the appellant wife is further that the respondent had taken to drinking and later on developed illicit relations with another lady. The appellant was initially working as a Comptist in Philips (India) Ltd. with a good salary and has hence retired therefrom, whereas the respondent husband was in the Ministerial Cadre in the Home Department of the State of Maharashtra and subsequently retired as Deputy Secretary. It is not disputed that the appellant wife at all material times had a far better salary that the respondent husband. The parties gave birth to three children during the course of their unhappy marital life, i.e. a son named Rajesh born on 21st April, 1970, a daughter named Unnati born on 6th December, 1979 and a son named Suprasad born on 5th July, 1981. It appears that after the birth of the first child, the appellant wife went away and stayed at another flat at Vikhroli only to return after a few years. During this turbulent relationship between the two, the three children all throughout remained with their mother.

3. The respondent husband filed M.J. Petition No. 662 of 1982 in the City Civil Court at Mumbai seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. The appellant wife contested this petition and in the written statement filed by her to this M.J. Petition, she claimed that she had left behind her ornaments of gold and silver and various household furniture and articles in the matrimonial home. It is material to note that the respondent husband did not file any counter to these averments. The aforesaid averments at the end of para 17 of her written statement read as follows: -

"17. ... The respondent states that all ornaments and other articles which are purchased by the respondent from her own earning are lying with the petitioner in his flat at Santacruz. Hereto annexed and marked Exh. "A" is the list of the ornaments of all types, household arti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document