Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
IQBAL – Appellant
Versus
RAHMATH – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. joint hearing of appeals concerning maintenance and return of gold. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. claims of the wife regarding gifts and allegations of cruelty. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 3. assessment of evidence for return of gold ornaments. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 4. evidence needed to establish claims in matrimonial disputes. (Para 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 5. accurate determination of maintenance based on financial capability. (Para 24 , 25 , 26) |
JUDGMENT
M.B.Snehalatha.J
We are disposing of these two appeals jointly since it arise from the very same judgment and decree of the Family Court, Tirur, namely, O.P.No.281/2014 filed by the wife against the husband and in-laws, claiming return of gold ornaments, patrimony and past maintenance. 2.
2. By the impugned judgment and decree, the Family Court disallowed the wife's claim for return of gold and cash but allowed the claim for past maintenance. Aggrieved by the declinement of the relief of return of gold and cash, the wife has preferred Mat.A No.607/2022. Mat.A No.164/2022 has been filed by the husband challenging the decree to the extent to which it directed him to pay past maintenance to the wife and child.
3. For the sake of convenience
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
