The judgment emphasized maintaining a balance between evidence credibility and financial support principles in family law cases.

J U D G M E N T

C.S.Sudha, J.

This appeal under Section 19 (1) of the Family Courts Act , 1984, has been filed by the petitioners against the order dated 14/10/2022 in O.P.No.579/2016 on the file of the Family Court, Tirur. The respondent herein/husband is the respondent in the original petition. The parties in this appeal will be referred to as described in the original petition.

2. The marriage of the first petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 12/04/1999 as per the rites and customs of the community to which they belong. In the wedlock, petitioners 2 to 4 were born. At the time of the marriage, the petitioner was given 85 sovereigns of gold ornaments by her father. The petitioners' father also entrusted an amount of ₹1 lakh to the respondent's father in his capacity as a trustee. The said amount was utilised by the respondent for clearing the liabilities that he is stated to have incurred for the conduct of the marriage. Out of the 85 sovereigns of gold ornaments of the petitioner, 53 sovereigns were sold and 23 cents of land purchased. Out of this 23 cents, 15 cents has been purchased in the name of the respondent and 8 cents in the name of the petitioner. From the remaining 32 sovereigns, 15 sovereigns were sold for the construction of a house in the property. 7.5 sovereigns had been given as mahar by the respondent at the time of the marriage. The same were sold and the proceeds utilised by the respondent for his business in meat. Thereafter out of the remaining 17 sovereigns, 12.5 sovereigns were pledged with the SBI, Tanur, and ₹1,63,000/- obtained by the respondent. The said amount has also been appropriated by the respondent. The petitioner is still repaying the said loan. The petitioner is in possession of only 4.5 sovereigns of gold ornaments. From the year 2009, the petitioners and the respondent have been residing in the new house constructed in the property. The respondent constantly harassed the first petitioner both physically and mentally and refused to maintain the petitioners. Now she has come to know that the respondent has married again and is living with his second wife. Hence, the petition for return of gold ornaments and past maintenance.

3. The respondent filed counter denying all the allegations in the petition. No money or gold had been entrusted or misappropriated by him. 15 cents was purchased in his name using his own funds. 8 cents was purchased by selling 20 sovereigns of the petitioner and also by utilising his funds. The 20 sovereigns of gold ornaments were not sold by the respondent, but sold by the petitioner's family and utilised for buying 8 cents of property in her name. The petitioner has a different case in Crime No.49/2017 registered alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. In the said crime, her case was that she had 82 sovereigns of gold ornaments and that ₹75,000/- had been given to the respondent by the petitioner's father and that 70 sovereigns had been sold by the respondent. The inconsistent versions of the petitioner itself would show that the case putforward by her is false. The allegation that the respondent is not looking after the petitioners is incorrect and false. The respondent has never harassed the first petitioner physically or mentally. There is no cause of action for the petitioners and hence they are not entitled to the reliefs prayed for.

4. On completion of pleadings, the parties went to trial. PW1 and PW2 were examined and Exts.A1 to A50 were marked on the side of the petitioners. RW1 was examined and Exts.B1 to B8 were marked on the side of the respondent. The trial court on an appreciation of the oral and documentary evidence and after hearing both sides, by the impugned judgment partly allowed the petition by which the claim for return of gold ornaments and money, has been declined. The respondent has been directed to pay past maintenance of ₹72,000/- to the first petitioner and ₹24,000/- each to petitioners 2 to 4. Aggrieved