Contributions towards property by either spouse give rise to equitable claims irrespective of title, affirming equal ownership under common fund principles.

JUDGMENT :

DR.ANITA SUMANTH, J.

PRAYER :- Appeal Suit - filed under Section 96 with Order 41 Rule 1 of CPC, to set aside the judgment and decree dated 22.04.2013 in O.S.No. 81 of 2012 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tiruchirappalli and allow this appeal with the costs.

The appellant was the plaintiff in O.S.No.81 of 2012 filed seeking relief of partition and separate possession of her half share in the properties at New Ward – D, Block No.40, T.S.No.153, Old Municipal Ward No.2, Block No.39, T.S.No.210 Vamadam Palla Street, Thennur, Trichirapalli (in short ‘suit property’) by metes and bounds.

2. The submissions of the appellant represented by Mr.H.Lakshmi Shankar are as follows. The parties had been married on 30.08.1990 and the appellant had secured employment in the passport office in 1993. The suit property had been purchased on 10.12.1997 under document No.3750 of 1997. The registration of the document was admittedly in the name of the defendant only and it is the appellant’s case that she had contributed equally towards the cost of the same.

3. The couple had commenced construction of the house in the property in 1998, for which purpose, they had jointly availed a housing loan from HDFC Bank, Trichy. The appellant had submitted that she had availed personal loans from Life Insurance Corporation of India, State Bank of India, Trichy Branch, Bank of India and a jewellery loan from TDCC Bank, Main Branch, Trichy apart from liquidating fixed deposits held by her in TDCC bank, Gandhi Market Branch, Trichy. She would also claim that her family, i.e., her father and brother had contributed towards the cost of construction of the suit property.

4. The personal relationship between the parties deteriorated as a result that the appellant filed HMOP No.215 of 2010 seeking dissolution of marriage before the Principal Sub Judge, Trichy. The respondent had submitted to the decree and hence their marriage had been dissolved on 07.01.2012. Being of the categoric view that her contribution towards the suit property was more than 50%, the appellant issued a legal notice on 06.04.2012 seeking partition of the suit property into two equal shares and allocation of one share to her by metes and bounds.

5. The response from the respondent was adverse, negating her rights in toto. The appellant would aver that the respondent is well aware of her legitimate claim over the property, since she had put forth such averments even during the proceedings before the Family Court which had never been objected to by him. She drew specific attention to a diary maintained by the respondent and certain entries therein as well as a letter written by him to her confirming the factum of her contributions.

6. The appellant had marked 13 documents, being Certified copy of sale deed bearing document No.3750 of 1997 dated 10.12.1997 – Ex.A.1; HDFC Bank loan documents – Ex.A.2; Savings Bank Pass book in the name of appellant (TCC Bank) – Ex.A.3; Copy of petition filed in HMOP.215/10 – Ex.A.4; Certified Xerox copy of decretal order in HMOP.215/10 dated 07.01.2012 – Ex.A.5; Lawyer’s notice dated 06.04.2012 – Ex.A.6; Reply notice dated 25.04.2012– Ex.A.7; Savings Bank passbook (Bank of India) – Ex.A.8. Diary maintained by respondent – Ex.A.9. Letter written by respondent to the appellan