Devan Ramachandran,J.

The respondent filed O.P.No.141/2019 on the files of the learned Family Court, Kasaragod, seeking partition of the petition A schedule property by metes and bounds, claiming half rights over it.

2. According to the respondent, the scheduled property has two items, both of which were purchased by him through two different documents - marked in evidence as Exts.A2 and A3 respectively; and he asserts that, after he made certain constructions thereon, he executed Ext.A1 settlement deed in favour of the appellant, transferring half rights over it to her. He thus claims to be the co-owner of the properties; and consequently sought his partition.

3. The appellant, on the other hand, argued that the entire property was purchased by the respondent utilizing the money she obtained by sale of one Acre of land of her brother; thus claiming to be exclusively hers, further asserting that she and her children are residing in the building on it.

4. The learned Family Court allowed the parties to go to trial and recorded the oral evidence of RW1 - namely the appellant herein, and of RW2, the Manager of a Bank. Even though the respondent did not enter into the box, Exts.A1 to A3 do