Kerala HC says woman can exclusively own property bought jointly with husband using her father’s money

You don’t have any Active Subscription.

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

The court also noted the husband’s admission that the property’s original title deed was in the petitioner’s possession and that she had obtained it from the Sub-Registry. | Photo Credit: The Hindu

The Kerala High Court has held that a woman could be the exclusive owner of a property bought jointly with her husband if the money used to buy it was from her father.

A Division Bench of Justices Sathish Ninan and P. Krishna Kumar was considering a petition filed by a woman seeking the return of gold ornaments, money, and her share of the residential property bought jointly with her husband.

The court denied her claims to the gold, money allegedly given to the husband, and past maintenance, but found that she was entitled to exclusive ownership of the property, since it was satisfied that the property was purchased for the petitioner.

The husband had argued that the property was bought using his own funds. However, the court noted that he had not produced any evidence to corroborate this. The court also noted the husband’s admission that the property’s original title deed was in the petitioner’s possession and that she had obtained it from the Sub-Registry.

The parties had first approached the Family Court, Malappuram, which found that the wife was not entitled to the gold ornaments or the money, but awarded ₹15 lakh for her share in the residential property. In essence, the High Court agreed with the trial court and granted the wife exclusive ownership, directing the husband to vacate the premises within three months.

The husband also contended that the petitioner’s claim to ₹15 lakh as her share of the property could not be allowed since the sale consideration shown in the sale deed was only ₹7.58 lakh and that, as per the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, evidence could not be given in contradiction to a verified agreement. In this regard, the court held that the Family Court could receive evidence to deal with a dispute even if it was not admissible under the Evidence Act, as per the Family Courts Act, 1984.

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.