1. The plaintiff in O.S. 208 of 1975 of the Munsiff's Court. Palai. is the appellant. Defendants 1 to 3 in the suit are the respondents. The plaintiff agreed to give his daughter in marriage to the second respondent. He intended to purchase an item of property in the name of his daughter and the 2nd respondent. A sum of Rs. 3001/- was paid to the 3rd defendant through the 1st defendant. The marriage did not take place. The respondents did not return the amount of Rs. 3001/-. which was obtained from the plaintiff. The suit was laid for the recovery of the said Rs. 3001/-with interest from 14-2-1975. Respondents' denied receipt of the amount. It was also. contended that the suit is not maintainable to recover the amount. since it was dowry coming within the purview of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The courts below concurrently found that respondents 1 and 2 received the amount. The trial court decreed the suit. In appeal the learned Subordinate Judge. Kottayam. found that the plaintiff paid the sum of Rs. 3001/- to defendants 2 and 3 and the 1st defendant is not liable. Even so. the lower appellate court held that the amount so paid satisfied the definition of dowry containe