JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

The appellant challenges the judgment and decree of the learned Family Court, Mavelikkara, in O.P.(Others) No.1015/2019.

2. The appellant filed the afore Original Petition, seeking return of her 90 sovereigns of gold or its value from the respondent which, she asserts, had been entrusted to him after their marriage in the year 2010. The learned Family Court, however, dismissed the Original Petition, concluding that there had been no entrustment of gold by the appellant to the respondent, as asserted by her. The appellant challenges this.

3. Sri.K.P.Sreekumar – learned counsel for the appellant, vehemently argued that the evidence of RW1 – namely, the respondent – establishes irresistibly that he had taken control of the entire gold ornaments and that the same was in his possession; which he sold subsequently, as has been imputed by his client. He argued that, when the answers of RW1 to certain specific questions travel clearly to the extent that he had taken the gold ornaments from his client, the findings of the learned Family Court can never be sustained. He prayed that this Appeal be hence allowed.

4. Sri.R.Harikrishnan – learned counsel for the resp