High Court Of Delhi
JECRONIMO FRANCISCO SACRAFAMILLA ERIC DSOUZA - Appellant
Versus
FLORENCE MARTHA DSOUZA NEE FERNANDES - Respondent
.
Decided On : 10/21/1979
{'KEYWORD': 'NULLITY OF MARRIAGE', 'SUBJECT': 'Impotency as a Ground for Nullity of Marriage', 'ACT SECTION LIST': 'Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (Sections 18, 19)'}
Fact of the Case:
A Christian couple married in 1971 faced difficulties in consummating their marriage due to the wife's alleged frigidity and aversion to sexual intercourse. The wife left the matrimonial home in 1973, and the Church dissolved the marriage in 1975 based on non-consummation. The husband filed a petition for a decree of dissolution of marriage under Sections 18 and 19 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, claiming that the wife's frigidity amounted to impotency.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there was a lack of evidence to establish that the wife's alleged impotency existed at the time of the institution of the suit, as required under Section 19(1) of the Indian Divorce Act. The court also noted that the Church's dissolution of the marriage did not affect the validity of the marriage under civil law.
Issues: 1. Whether frigidity or aversion to sexual intercourse in a wife can be regarded as impotency in the female. 2. Whether the petitioner had provided sufficient evidence to establish impotency at the time of the institution of the suit.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court acknowledged that there was some authority to support the contention that frigidity or conscious opposition to sexual intercourse could be considered impotency, but it declined to comment definitively on this issue as it required further examination. 2. The court held that the petitioner had failed to provide sufficient evidence to establish that the wife's alleged impotency existed at the time of the institution of the suit, as required under Section 19(1) of the Indian Divorce Act. The court noted that the petitioner's testimony was silent on the state of affairs regarding impotency at the time of filing the petition, and that there was a three-year gap between the Church's dissolution of the marriage and the filing of the petition.
Final Decision: The court set aside the decree of nullity granted by the lower court and remanded the case for further trial, allowing the petitioner to lead additional evidence to bring his case within the ambit of Section 19(1) of the Indian Divorce Act.
( 1 ) THE petitioner and the respondent are Christians professing the Roman Catholic Faith. They were married on February 20, 1971 in New Delhi. After marriage they resided together for a week in Delhi and then went to Goa to the house of the petitioner s parents. In Goa they stayed for about a month and then returned to Delhi. The petitioner had a house in Old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi and the parties lived there.
( 2 ) ACCORDING to the petitioner the marriage was never consummated on account of a mental blockade which the respondent had. She allegedly told the petitioner that she cannot permit the petitioner to have sexual intercourse with her as she would suffer pain and was afraid of that. According to the petitioner he tried his best to persuade the respondent to have normal conjugal relations but failed in his attempts. The attitude of the respondent towards leading a normal married life was then allegedly discussed by the parties with the respondent s mother. She is also stated to have tried to persued her daughter to lead normal life and consummate the marriage but in vain. The petitioner states that respondent s mother even took the respondent to consult a doctor but the respondent s attitude did not change. In consequence, differences arose between the parties leading to the respondent finally leaving the matrimonial home in September 1973 to live with her mother at Pusa Road, New Delhi. The petitioner further states that in May. 1974 the respondent addressed a letter to his Holiness Pope Paul VL for grant of a dispensation dissolving the marriage on the ground of non-consummation. The Church ordered an investigation on the representation moved by the respondent. As a result of that investigation the Church granted the prayer of the respondent and the marriage was dissolved. A communication to this effect was received by the petitioner from the Chancellor of the Archdiocess of Delhi in March 1975.
( 3 ) THE petitioner contends that on account of the non-consummation of marriage due to the respondent s attitude and due to her admission that she did not want to have sexual intercourse with the petitioner as she had fear of pain as also be ause she had no love for him the respondent should be held to be impotent qua the petitioner. The petitioner also relies on an admission by the respondent that the marriage could not be consummated on account of her frigidity. Thus the petitioner filed apetition under Sec- tions 18 and 19 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 for a decree of dissolution of marriage. This petition was filed in March, 1978.
( 4 ) IN the District Judge s court the petition was heard ex parte as the respondent did not put in appearance despite service. In support of the contentions in the petition the petitioner only examined himself as a witness. He did not produce any other evidence. He deposed that he was married according to the Christian rites in New Delhi on February 20, 1971. The marriage was never consummated. Initially the respondent expressed a fear that she will have pain on account of sexual intercourse She would not even allow the petitioner to touch her. She had a mental blockade against sexual intercourse. The matter was discussed by the respondent with her mother in the petitioner s presence. Even the mother s persuasion had no effect. A doctor was consulted by the respondent alongwith her mother but there was no change. The respondent remained frigid and cold and finally left the matrimonial home in September 1973. She refused to come back and discharge her matrimonial obligations. The Church dissolved the marriage on the ground of non-consummation after due investigation. The respondent had expressed herself to the effect that she did not love the petitioner and did not want to have sex with him. She had married the petitioner in deference to the wishes of her mother and in fact did not want to marry him.
( 5 ) ON the basis of the exparte evidence, Additional District Judge,
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.