‘Common knowledge’ that brides entrust gold to spouses: Kerala High Court upholds woman’s claim for return of 40 sovereigns

Background

• The couple got married in August 1999. The woman claimed that her parents gave her 45 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs 50,000 at the time of marriage.
• She further submitted that when she went to the matrimonial home, she was sent with household articles worth Rs 30,000.
• The estranged wife claimed that out of the said gold ornaments, 40 sovereigns were allegedly taken by her husband and his mother, who held the same in “trust”.
• It is further alleged that the ornaments were sold to purchase an autorickshaw for her husband and to construct a residential building.
• The woman also claimed that she entrusted Rs 50,000 to her husband.

‘Compelled to leave matrimonial home’

• The estranged wife claimed that she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home due to ill-treatment at the hands of her husband.
• She further contended that she is entitled to recover the gold ornaments, money and household articles.
• She also claimed past and future maintenance on the ground that she is unable to maintain herself, and the estranged husband has sufficient means to provide the amount sought.

Entitled to Rs 5 lakh, 16 sovereigns of gold: Husband’s claim

• On the contrary, the estranged husband denied all the allegations and stated that he never received any gold ornaments or money from his wife.
• He further denied misappropriating the money or the gold ornaments and refuted all allegations raised against him.
• He had also claimed that some ornaments worn by his wife were not genuine gold.
• The estranged husband claimed that he is entitled to recover 16 sovereigns of gold ornaments and Rs 5 lakh from his wife, which he allegedly gave her.
• He also denied his liability to pay maintenance.

Observation: ‘Financial condition of husband, wife’

• The estranged wife has claimed that she had 45 sovereigns of gold ornaments at the time of her marriage, which she gave to her husband and his mother soon after the wedding.
• It is clear that the estranged husband does not seriously dispute the quantity of gold ornaments worn by his wife at the time of marriage, the court noted.
• His contention is restricted to the correct number of the listed items.
• He has also pointed out that the list includes some of the ornaments that were allegedly given by him to his wife.

• He had also claimed that some ornaments worn by his wife were not genuine gold.
• However, it was placed on record that he was working as a coolie, earning only Rs 150 to Rs 250 per day at the time of marriage, which does not allow the court to accept that the ornaments worn by his wife included gold given by him.
• On the other hand, the estranged husband had admitted that his father-in-law was employed abroad at the time of marriage, reflecting their better financial condition.
• The estranged wife had placed on record a series of photographs showing that she was wearing the ornaments at the time of marriage.
• Considering all the circumstances of the case, it is probable that the wife entrusted her gold ornaments to her husband and mother-in-law.
• There is no case against the mother-in-law since she was not directly involved in the misappropriation of the ornaments or money.
• Moreover, the wife’s gold was utilised for purchasing an autorickshaw for her husband and for similar purposes.
• The wife’s claim for Rs 50,000 and the household articles is considered as there is no evidence refuting the same.
• The estranged husband’s claim that he had given 16 sovereigns of gold ornaments or Rs 5 lakh to his wife is not convincing, since no evidence establishes that he had sufficient financial means to mobilise such funds before the marriage.