Evidence of entrustment of gold ornaments by a wife to her husband is a valid basis for recovery, alongside maintenance claims.

JUDGMENT

P.Krishna Kumar, J.

The appellant is the respondent in O.P. No. 585/2013 on the file of the Family Court, Attingal. The said petition was filed by his wife seeking recovery of gold ornaments and money and for maintenance. By the impugned judgment, the Family Court partly allowed the petition.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are hereinafter referred to as they were arrayed in the original petition. The petitioner and the respondent were married on 26.11.2012. The petitioner alleges that at the time of marriage, her parents gave her 75 sovereigns of gold ornaments and that on the next day, when she went to her matrimonial home, the respondent and his relatives obtained 70 sovereigns of gold from her, representing that the same would be kept in a locker. The petitioner further alleged that there was an Acharam ceremony on 28.10.2012 and that on that occasion the respondent was given a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- by her father as pocket money. According to the petitioner, on 03.12.2012, she was forcibly sent to her parental home by the respondent and his relatives, without returning her gold ornaments. Alleging that she is unable to maintain herself and that the respondent is earning a monthly salary of Rs.1,20,000/- from his employment abroad, she claimed maintenance at the rate of Rs.6,000/- per month.

3. The respondent filed a counter denying the above allegations. According to him, on 10.11.2012, a Valaideel function was conducted prior to the marriage, and on that occasion the respondent and his relatives gave 25½ sovereigns of gold ornaments to the petitioner. He denied the receipt of Rs.5,00,000/- contending that no Acharam ceremony was conducted. He further stated that he was unaware of the quantity of gold possessed by the petitioner and that whatever gold ornaments she wore at the time of marriage remained in her possession when she left his house. The respondent raised a counterclaim seeking recovery of 25½ sovereigns of gold ornaments from the petitioner. He also claimed compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- alleging that the petitioner had suppressed her mental illness.

4. During the trial, PW1 to PW4 and RW1 to RW3 were examined, and Exts. A1 to A13 and B1 and B2 were marked. Upon evaluating the oral and documentary evidence, the trial court decreed the petition directing the respondent to return 73 sovereigns of gold ornaments or Rs.19,74,977/- being its market value, with interest at 9% per annum from the date of decree. The court also allowed recovery of Rs.5,00,000/- with 9% interest and awarded maintenance at the rate of Rs.4,000/- per month. The counterclaim was dismissed.

5. We have heard the learned counsel appearing for both sides.

6. While considering the question as to the quantity of gold possessed by the petitioner at the time of her marriage, it is to be noted that the respondent has not specifically denied her claim that she had 75 sovereigns of gold. By producing Exts. A5 and A7, which are receipts evidencing the purchase of 73 sovereigns of gold, the petitioner has substantially established that she had 75 sovereigns of gold at the time of marriage. Ext. A2 series marriage photographs also corroborate her claim.

7. To prove the entrustment of 70 sovereigns of gold ornaments to the respondent, the petitioner primarily relies on her oral testimony. To corroborate her version, she produced Ext. A4 FIR dated 06.01.2023, registered on the basis of her complaint, wherein it is stated that the respondent and his relatives obtained 70 sovereigns of gold ornaments immediately after the marriage.