Advocates:
['JITENDRA SHRIVASTAVA', '', 'UTTARA SHRIVASTAVA', 'SANJAY PATEL', 'MANOJ PARANJPE']

NAFR

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

FAM No. 101 of 2014

1. Abhishek Pandey, S/o Sudarshan Pandey, aged about 30 years,

2. Sudarshan Pandey, S/o Baldau Pandey, aged about 62 years,

Both are by Caste-Bramhan, R/o Bhitthi Road, Trimurti Bhawan,

Kedarpur, Thana and Tahsil Ambikapur, Distt. Surguja (C.G.).

---- Appellants/Defendants

Versus

 Smt. Sangeeta Pandey, W/o Abhishek Pandey, aged about 28

years, Caste-Bramhan, R/o Godhanpur, Thana and Tahsil

Ambikapur, District Surguja (C.G.).

---- Respondent/Plaintiff

FAM No. 117 of 2014

 Smt. Sangita Pandeya W/o Abhisek Pandeya, aged about 28

years, R/o Godhanpur, P.S. and Post – Ambikapur, Civl &

Revenue District Surguja C.G.

---- Appellant/Plaintiff

Versus

1. Abhisek Pandeya, S/o Sudarshan Pandeya, aged about 30

years,

2. Sudarshan Pandey, S/o Baldau Pandeya, aged about 62 years,

Both R/o Bhatti Road, Trimurti Bhawan, Kedarpur, Ambikapur,

P.S., Post & Tahsil Ambikapur, Civil & Revenue District Surguja

C.G.

---- Respondent/Defendants

For the Appellant/

:-

Mr. Hariom Rai on behalf of Mr. Jitendra

Defendants

Shrivastava, Advocate.

For the Respondent/ :-

Mr. Shubhank Tiwari on behalf of Mr.

Plaintiff

Manoj Pranjpe, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vimla Singh Kapoor,

Order on Board by Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava J.

06.03.2020

Heard.

2

2.

These two appeals, one filed by the plaintiff and other filed

by the defendants arise out of common judgment and decree

dated 11.09.2014 passed by the Family Court, Ambikapur in Civil

Suit No. 100-A of 2011, whereby application of the plaintiff for

return of Stridhan has been partly allowed.

3.

The plaintiff Sangita Pandey moved an application under

Section 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act r/w Section 7 (I) (g) of the

Family Courts Act, seeking decree of return of Stridhan as

described in schedule A, B, C, D, E and F (appended to the plaint)

on the pleadings that marriage between plaintiff Sangita was

solemnized with defendant Abhishek Pandey on 28.06.2009,

according to Hindu rites and rituals. It was alleged that after

sometime, in connection with demand of dowry and also vehicle,

she was subjected to cruelty and thereafter, she was taken away

from the matrimonial house and brought to her parental house.

According to the pleadings contained in paragraphs 5 to 8 of the

plaint, number of gift items were given at and about the time of

marriage between the parties, details of which were given in

schedule appended with the plaint and all those articles,

belonging to the plaintiff, are liable to be returned. An additional

prayer was also made for return of Rs.7 lacs which, according to

the plaintiff, was given by her father at the time of her marriage.

4.

As far as, plaintiff's claim for return of Stridhan is

concerned, in response to the pleadings made in paragraphs 5 to

8, defence of the defendants was that the plaintiff's claim for

3

return of Stridhan is exaggerated. According to the defendants,

though Rs.6 Lacs was given, the same was utilized to bear

expenditure of marriage including purchase of jewelleries, food

etc. Other articles were given as gifts to his son, which, cannot be

said to be Stridhan. It was also pleaded that at the time of living

matrimonial house plaintiff had taken away along with her, all her

clothes and jewelleries and some old clothes are only lying

behind.

5.

On the basis of the pleadings of the parties, the learned

Family Court framed issues, allowed the parties to lead oral and

documentary evidence. Vide impugned judgment and decree, the

learned Family Court partly allowed the claim of the plaintiff.

Excluding some of the articles mentioned in schedule A, B, C, D,

E remaining articles listed in the list were ordered to be returned.

As far as, car is concerned, the claim was given up

because the car had already been returned.