JUDGMENT

Sathish Ninan, J.

The original petition filed by the wife against the husband, seeking return of gold and money, was dismissed by the Family Court. The wife is in appeal.

2. The marriage between the parties was solemnised on 28.09.2012. The husband was abroad during that time. After the marriage, the wife was taken to the matrimonial home on 14.09.2013. It is the claim of the wife that, before she was taken to the matrimonial home, her parents provided her with 25 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs.2,00,000/-. The gold and money were misappropriated by the husband for investing in the business at abroad. The parties fell apart. Accordingly, the original petition was filed for return of gold and money.

3. The respondent contended that, at the time of marriage the petitioner had only 15 sovereigns of gold ornaments. It was claimed that he had provided her as mahar, a gold chain weighing 2.5 sovereigns. The alleged payment of Rs.2,00,000/- was denied. The allegation of misappropriation was denied. It was contended that when the wife went back to her parental home she had taken most of the gold ornaments with her and that the remaining ornaments were returned through her father