IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JJ
Seena V W/o. The Late Premkumar – Appellant
Versus
Rohini W/o. N.raveendran – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sathish Ninan, J.
The original petition filed by the wife before the Family Court, seeking a declaration that Ext.A5=Ext.B2 Cancellation Deed, cancelling Ext.A4=Ext.B1 Settlement Deed, is null and void, for declaration of her half right over the property, and for recovery of gold ornaments, money and movables, was decreed in part. Challenging that part of the decree which refused the reliefs sought, she is in appeal.
2. The marriage of the petitioner-wife with late Premkumar was on 11.05.2010. Premkumar died on 03.10.2011. The respondents in the original petition, who are the respondents in this appeal, are the in-laws of the petitioner-wife.
3. According to the petitioner, after her marriage with Premkumar, there was “Adukalakanal”, a customary function, on 13.05.2010. On that date, the 1st respondent(father-in-law) was entrusted with an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- towards petitioner's share. On 11.06.2010, a further amount of Rs.3,00,000/- was entrusted with the husband towards her share. At the time of marriage, the petitioner had 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments; out of the same, 2.5 sovereigns are with her. The remaining gold ornaments and the money were misappropriated by t



A valid gift under the Transfer of Property Act must be accepted by the donee during their lifetime; a subsequent cancellation is ineffective if the donee has passed away.
A unilateral cancellation of a Settlement Deed is impermissible if the deed has been accepted and acted upon, as established by legal precedents.
The court upheld the validity of a decree for the return of gold ornaments based on insufficient counter-evidence and adequate testimonial support from the petitioner.
The legal effect of a cancellation deed executed to cancel a settlement deed and the interpretation of Ext.B1 as a gift deed.
Unilateral cancellation of a registered gift deed is invalid without specific grounds for revocation under law, reaffirming 'possession follows title'.
The court upheld the return of gold ornaments based on the principle that women may face unique evidentiary challenges in family disputes, requiring a pragmatic legal approach.
The husband, being the sole legal heir, retains rights over the deceased wife's assets under Hindu Succession Act, regardless of allegations against him.
A settlement deed cannot be unilaterally cancelled unless the settlor expressly reserves such a right; otherwise, the cancellation is void.
Unilateral cancellation of a settlement deed is void unless explicitly allowed in the document; the nature of such documents determines rights and responsibilities without ambiguity.
The court adopted a pragmatic approach in disputes involving the return of gold ornaments, recognizing the inherent difficulties women face in evidencing familial entrustments, thus adopting a prepon....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.