Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SATHISH NINAN, P. KRISHNA KUMAR, JJ
JOHNY S/O. LASSER – Appellant
Versus
SHEELA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to family court decree regarding gold ornaments and marriage expenses. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. court observed issues with evidence regarding the gold ornaments. (Para 5) |
| 3. court concluded equitable possession of gold ornaments. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. decision on marriage expenses and appeal outcome. (Para 8) |
Sathish Ninan, J.
The decree for gold and money, is under challenge by the respondents in the original petition.
2. The original petition is filed by the wife and daughter, against the husband/father and mother-in-law, claiming return of gold ornaments and for marriage expenses for the daughter. According to the petitioners case, at the time of marriage of the first petitioner and first respondent, which was solemnized on 24.04.2006, the first petitioner was provided with 30 sovereigns of gold ornaments. The ornaments were misappropriated by the respondents. In the marital relationship, the second petitioner- daughter was born. The parties fell apart. By way of the original petition, return of the 30 sovereigns of gold ornaments and marriage expenses of ₹ 10 lakhs is claimed.
3. The Family Court decreed the original petition, as was prayed for.
4. We have heard learn
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
