JUDGMENT :

A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.

This Mat. Appeal impugns the judgment dated 29.04.2024 of the Family Court, Muvattupuzha in O.P.No.384 of 2020.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows:

The appellants herein are respondents 1 and 2 viz., husband and father-in-law respectively, and the respondent herein was the petitioner/wife in O.P.No.384 of 2020 on the files of Family Court, Muvattupuzha. The original petition was filed by the respondent herein seeking return of 80 sovereigns of gold ornaments or its market value along with Rs.5,00,000/- with 6% interest from the date of filing of the original petition; Rs.12,00,000/- spent towards marriage and engagement expenses and Rs.50,00,000/- as compensation from the appellants. The 1^st appellant and the respondent were married in accordance with Hindu religious rites on 30.06.2019. It is the case of the respondent that the marriage was fixed through the Kerala matrimony, and on the marriage being fixed, the 2^nd appellant had demanded Rs.5,00,000/- towards marriage expenses. Accordingly, the said amount was handed over by the father of the respondent to the 2^nd appellant on the date of engagement. It is also contended that at the time of marriage, the respondent was wearing 90 sovereigns of gold ornaments and she was presented with a brand new I-20 Magna car. The respondent had also contended that out of the 90 sovereigns of gold ornaments, the 1^st appellant had appropriated 60 sovereigns of gold ornaments in the month of July itself under the guise of keeping the same in the safe custody of his locker maintained with the State Bank of India, Koothattukulam branch. She was permitted to keep some gold ornaments in the house itself on her insistence. The respondent contends that after obtaining Rs.5,00,000/- and gold ornaments, the appellants and their family harassed her demanding more cash from her house and insulted her stating that she was blind. The respondent thereupon had demanded to return her gold ornaments pledged by the appellants and the same was not returned. On 24.08.2019, the respondent returned to her house from her coaching class and later the 2^nd appellant and his wife had brought the car to her parental home. The respondent thus claims return of gold ornaments and claimed marital expenses and compensation of Rs.50,00,000/-.

3. The 1^st appellant filed a written statement denying that the 2^nd appellant had demanded Rs.5,00,000/- and stated that no amount was given to him on the date of engagement. The 1^st appellant also disputed the quantum of gold ornaments worn by the respondent and the receipt of a brand new I-20 Magna car. According to the 1^st appellant, in the register maintained in the SNDP Branch, it was recorded as the respondent was given 80 sovereigns of gold ornaments and a car. The 1^st appellant categorically denied the entrustment of gold ornaments of the respondent with him and his family, and contended that the respondent had exchanged one gold chain weighing 10 sovereigns without the consent of the 1^st appellant. According to the 1^st appellant, he had transferred cash to the account of the respondent for her education expenses even after she left the matrimonial home. Even though the respondent had returned to her parental home in August 2019, during November 2019, the 1^st appellant as well as the respondent had gone to Midnapur University for collecting the Degree certificate of the respondent. He also denied the contention raised by the respondent that the gold ornaments of the respondent were sold by him.

4. Before the Family Court, both sides let in evidence. PW1 to PW4 were examined on behalf of the respondent and Exts.A1 to A30, Exts.X1 to X3 and Ext.X4 series were marked. The appellants examined three witnesses as RW1 to RW3 and marked Exts.B1 to B9.

5. On the basis of the pleadings and the evidence on record, the Family Court found that the respondent herein was entitled to get Rs.5,00,000/- given in connection wi