SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1981 Supreme(Bom) 171

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
A.N. Mody, J.
P.V. Gopalkrishnan..... Appellant.
Versus
Kanaksha Gopalkrishnan (Mrs.)..... Respondents.
First Appeal No. 374 of 1980, decided on 14/15-7-81.
Advocates appeared :
M.K. Nesari, for appellant.
C.R. Dalvi, for respondent.

Headnote:

NULLITY OF MARRIAGE - HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 12(1)(A) AND (C) - GROUNDS - NON-CONSUMMATION OF MARRIAGE - IMPOTENCY - FRAUD - MATERIAL FACT OR CIRCUMSTANCE CONCERNING THE RESPONDENT - CONCEALMENT OF PROLAPSE OF UTERUS - WHETHER AMOUNTS TO FRAUD - MEANING OF 'IMPOTENCY' - WHETHER INCLUDES INABILITY TO PERFORM SEXUAL ACT IN NORMAL WAY - WHETHER INCLUDES AVERSION OR ABHORRENCE CAUSED BY PROLAPSE.

Fact of the Case:

Petitioner (husband) filed a petition for nullity of marriage within a short time of marriage due to non-consummation. The respondent (wife) denied the allegations and claimed that the marriage was consummated. The petitioner alleged that the respondent was suffering from second-degree prolapse of the uterus, which was indicative of non-virginity. He also alleged that the respondent had suppressed material facts about sexual lapse and defect, and that his consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the respondent was aware of her condition of prolapse since prior to marriage and that either she wanted to hide her condition from the petitioner or had developed abhorrence or repugnance towards intercourse. The court also found that the respondent's condition amounted to impotency, as it made intercourse imperfect or painful and caused aversion or abhorence in the petitioner.

Issues: 1. Whether the respondent was aware of her condition of prolapse since prior to marriage? 2. Whether the respondent's condition amounted to impotency? 3. Whether the non-disclosure of the prolapse amounted to fraud as to a material fact or circumstance concerning the respondent?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the respondent was aware of her condition of prolapse since prior to marriage, based on the following evidence: - The respondent's own admission that she had noticed the prolapse after the medical examination by Dr. Bhatia. - The respondent's failure to ask either of the doctors what her ailment was, despite being examined by both of them. - The respondent's statement in the advocate's reply letter that the petitioner's discovery of the prolapse was a result of minute examination of the respondent's anatomy. 2. The court held that the respondent's condition amounted to impotency, as it made intercourse imperfect or painful and caused aversion or abhorence in the petitioner, based on the following evidence: - The medical evidence that the prolapse made intercourse possible only after manipulation with hands, which would likely cool down the ardor and desire of the husband to perform the sexual act. - The respondent's resistance to the petitioner's approaches to consummate the marriage. 3. The court held that the non-disclosure of the prolapse amounted to fraud as to a material fact or circumstance concerning the respondent, as it was a material fact that would have materially interfered with the sexual life and pleasure of the petitioner.

Final Decision: The court set aside the judgment and decree of the trial court dismissing the petition and made the petition absolute in terms of prayer (a), granting the petitioner a decree of nullity of marriage. The court also ordered the respondent to be paid a lump sum of Rs. 13,500/- as and by way of permanent alimony.

Judgment

A.N. MODY, J.:---The appellant (original petitioner) the husband, and the respondent (the original respondent) were married on 20th June, 1976. The appellant and the respondent were both Hindus and were about 36 and 27 years of age respectively at the time of marriage. Due to certain unfortunate circumstances, the husband was driven to file a petition for nullity within a short time which he did on or about 30th November, 1976.

2. The petition proceeds to make the following allegations. The marriage had not been consummated owing to the impotency of the respondent. On the very first night the respondent refused to have sexual intercourse saying that for one year she would not have sexual intercourse with the appellant. The respondent appeared to be very much upset at the approach of the appellant to consummate the marriage and was averse to any sexual act. It was decided by the petitioner and his elders to take the respondent on a pilgrimage so that there might be a change in her mentality and outlook by the blessing of God. Even during pilgrimage the matter did not improve. Soon after return from pilgrimage on 29-7-1976 the respondent's father had come to the petitioner's house and the petitioner complained to her father about the behaviour of the respondent. Father ignored the complaint. The respondent's attitude continued. Then followed a medical check up on 27-8-1976, by Dr. Bhatia when it was discovered by the petitioner that the respondent was suffering from second degree prolapse of the uterus. This was indicative of non-virginity. Taking into consideration the medical report and the odd behaviour of the respondent and the surrounding circumstances, the petitioner had reasons to suspect that the respondent wanted to conceal facts from the petitioner and that was one of the main reasons why she was refusing to have sexual intercourse with the petitioner and have the marriage consummated. It was clear from the conduct of the respondent and that of her parents that fraud was committed and that the marriage had been brought about by fraud and misrepresentation. The respondent and her parents had suppressed material facts about sexual lapse and defect. The petitioners' consent to the marriage was obtained by fraud and misrepresentation as to the material fact or circumstances concerning the respondent. In any event, the respondent was important at relevant time and there was non-consummation by reason thereof. The petitioner prayed for annulment of the marriage under section 12(1)(a) and (c). In the written statement the respondent denied that marriage was not consummated or that she refused to consummate the marriage or was averse to sexual act or that she was impotent at any time. It is alleged that she was taken to Dr. Bhatia on 27th August, 1976 but the respondent did not understand the result of the said examination. It is denied that the respondent suffered from sexual defects before her marriage and it is averred that neither she nor her parents were aware of any defect at any time before or after the marriage.

3. Mr. Nesari for the appellant has taken me through the evidence and the judgment and contended that the learned trial Judge has not correctly appraised the evidence and on the balance ought to have accepted the evidence of the petitioner and Dr. Bhatia and rejected the evidence of the respondent as unreliable and that of Dr. Pancholi as not very reliable on certain aspects of the matter in view of contradictions and that if the evidence of petitioner and Dr. Bhatia is accepted, the grounds for nullity stand proved.

4. Before considering the evidence of the petitioner, I will deal with the evidence of the respondent as in my view her evidence is completely unreliable and the petitioner's evidence not being inherently unreliable will have to be accepted, irrespective of some discrepancies.

5. In her examination-in-chief, she says that after marriage, the petitioner and she resided together at Goregaon. Afte






























































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top