Introduction:

In the landmark case of Mat. Appeal 291 of 2020, the Kerala High Court, comprising Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice M. B. Snehalatha, addressed the intricate issue of a wife’s claim over her ‘Sreedhan’—gold and cash given during marriage. The appellant, the wife, contended that she was entitled to the return of 65½ sovereigns of gold ornaments, which she claimed were in her husband’s possession. The husband refuted this, asserting that she had taken all her ornaments upon leaving the matrimonial home.

Arguments:

The wife’s counsel argued that the gold ornaments were gifted to her by her parents and relatives at the time of marriage, and that she had left them at her in-laws’ residence, except for daily wear items. She maintained that she did not retrieve these ornaments when she left for pregnancy care and never returned due to marital discord. The husband, on the other hand, claimed that she had taken all her ornaments with her.

Court’s Judgment:

The Court emphasised that ‘Sreedhan’ is the exclusive property of the wife and that, due to the private and informal nature of such transactions, documentary evidence is often unavailable. Therefore, the principle of preponderance of probabilities should be applied. The Court found the wife’s version more plausible, supported by evidence of her parents’ financial capacity and the existence of a fixed deposit used to purchase the gold. It was deemed improbable that she would have taken all her ornaments when leaving for pregnancy care. However, the Court noted the lack of evidence regarding the 6 sovereigns claimed to be gifted by her cousins and denied the claim for household articles due to insufficient proof. Consequently, the Court held that the wife had proven that 59½ sovereigns of her gold ornaments were with her husband and ordered their return.