Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Sathish Ninan, Shoba Annamma Eapen, JJ
BINDHIYAS – Appellant
Versus
SHARAFUDHEEN – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. husband's denial of claims (Para 3) |
| 2. evidence from photographs (Para 7 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. claim for money disallowed (Para 8) |
| 4. nature of fiduciary relationship (Para 11) |
| 5. claims for gifts unsupported (Para 12) |
| 6. liability of husband's mother (Para 13) |
| 7. decree for gold ornaments (Para 14) |
JUDGMENT
Sathish Ninan, J.
Challenging the dismissal of the original petition for patrimony and gold, the wife is in appeal. The 1st respondent is the husband and the 2nd respondent is his mother.
2. The marriage between the parties was solemnised on 24.06.2000. According to the wife, at the time of marriage, she was provided with 72 sovereigns of gold ornaments and an amount of Rs.2,00,000/- as patrimony. After the marriage, the gold ornaments and the money were kept with the respondents. Even as against the permission of the wife, the husband sold away the gold ornaments and utilised the money. The wife was expelled from the matrimonial home on 02.03.2009. She claims return of patrimony and gold ornaments.
3. The husband denied the claim that the wife was provided with 72 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.2,00,000/- as patrimony. He also denied the allegation that the same were utili
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
