Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
PRAMOD.E.S. – Appellant
Versus
NEETHU.P.S. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court validity of claimant's gold return claim. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. challenges against evidence and their repercussions. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 19) |
| 3. evidentiary support for claims of misappropriated gold. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 15 , 17 , 18) |
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The appellant challenges the judgment of the learned Family Court, Ernakulam, in O.P.No.1635/2014.
2. The afore Original Petition was filed by the respondent herein - who is his former wife, seeking return of 101 sovereigns of gold and Rs.50,000/-, which she claims to comprise her patrimony.
3. The appellant contested the afore claim, asserting that the gold ornaments brought by the respondent are not gold, but are “imitations”; and further, that none of it, nor the money, was ever entrusted with him.
4. The learned Family Court allowed the parties to trial and recorded the evidence of the respondent as PW1, as also PW2 on her side; while, that of the appellant was RW1. In addition, three documents were marked on the side of the respondent herein as Exts.A1 to A3; while, the appellant produced no documents.
5. The learned Court, after analyzing the evidence on record, found that the respondent is entitl
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
