Sathish Ninan, J.

The decree for gold and money, in an original petition filed by the wife against the husband and in-laws, is under challenge by the respondents.

2. The first respondent in the original petition is the husband, the second respondent is his mother, the third respondent his brother, and the 4^th respondent is his father. The marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent was solemnized on 05.05.2011. During that time, the petitioner was employed at Ireland. According to her, at the time of marriage she was having 85 sovereigns of gold ornaments. It is her contention that, on the very next day of marriage, ie. on 06.05.2011, as was required by respondents 3 and 4, the petitioner entrusted her entire gold ornaments except a chain of two sovereigns, with respondents 1 and 2. The entrustment was for the purpose of keeping it in a locker which was opened in the name of respondents 1 and 2 just a couple of days prior to the marriage. After the marriage, on 04.06.2011, the wife returned to Ireland. The petitioner alleges that the entire gold ornaments were sold by respondents and the proceeds were utilised for clearing a housing loan of the respondents. In June 2011