1971 Supreme(Del) 250
High Court Of Delhi
VED PARKASH SACHDEVA - Appellant
Versus
MOHANI SACHDEVA - Respondent
First Appeal Order 123 of 1970
Decided On : 09/17/1971
A.N.Mulla, O.N.MOHINDRU, Uma Datta
Impotency at the time of marriage and continuing till the filing of the petition is a ground for annulment of marriage under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Headnote:
HINDU MARRIAGE ACT, 1955 - SECTION 12 - ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE - IMPOTENCY - HUSBAND'S IMPOTENCY AT THE TIME OF MARRIAGE AND CONTINUING TILL THE FILING OF THE PETITION - WIFE ENTITLED TO ANNULMENT OF MARRIAGE.
Fact of the Case:
The wife filed a petition for annulment of marriage under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on the ground that the husband was impotent at the time of marriage and continued to be so till the institution of the proceedings. The husband resisted the petition and claimed that he had consummated the marriage on various occasions.
Finding of the Court:
The trial court, believing the evidence produced by the wife, came to the conclusion that the husband was impotent at the time of marriage and continued to be so, and so granted the petition for annulment.
Issues: 1. Whether the husband was impotent at the time of marriage and continued to be so till the filing of the petition? 2. Whether the wife was entitled to annulment of marriage under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the husband was impotent at the time of marriage and continued to be so till the filing of the petition, based on the evidence produced by the wife, including letters written by the husband admitting his impotency. 2. The court held that the wife was entitled to annulment of marriage under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, as the husband's impotency was a ground for annulment.
Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, and the parties were left to bear their own costs.
( 1 ) THIS is an appeal by a husband under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act against the order of an Additional District Judge annulling the marriage under section 12 of the Act. The parties were married on 26th March, 1969 at Delhi according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. The wife lived with the husband till 13th May, 1969, and since the husband could not consummate the marriage she left him never to return to the matrimonial home. On 18th December, 1969, the wife filed a petition under section 12 of the Act for annulment of marriage on the ground that the husband was impotent at the time of marriage and continued to be so till the institution of the proceedings.
( 2 ) THE husband resisted the petition and claimed that he had, in fact, consummated the marriage on various occasions when the wife lived with him.
( 3 ) THE trial court believing the evidence produced by the wife came to the conclusion that the husband was impotent at the time of mage and continued to be so, and so granted the petition for annulment.
( 4 ) MR. A. N. Mulia, learned counsel for the husband-appellant, contends that the trial court erred in believing the wife whose evidence was not corroborated by any other evidence. Moreover, he contends that there was nothing on record to show that the husband s impotency continued till the filing of the petition.
( 5 ) THE evidence in this case consists of the statements made by the wife and the husband in support of their contentions. The wife also relies on letters. Exhibits P-A, P-B, and P-C, admittedly written by the husband. According to the wife, inspite of the fact that the husband was sleeping with her during the period she stayed with him, he could not produce erection and therefore could not consummate the marriage inspite of various attempts made by him. They had gone out to Kashmir after one week of their marriage for honey-moon, but still the husband failed to consummate. After leaving matrimonial home the husband had been meeting her at various places including her hostel as well as restaurants.
( 6 ) THE husband deposed that he had been able to consurnmate the marriage on the very first night and thereafter, practically every day he slept with her. He admitted writings Exhibits P-1, P-B and P-C. He, however, explained that Exhibits P-A and P-B were written by him on the persuation and suggestion of the wife s father so that he could show them to the biradari . As regards Exhibit P-C, he stated that it was obtained from him under duress and he immediately sent telegrams to the police station as well as to the trial court.
( 7 ) IN Exhibit P-A, the husband has written that he had got into the had habit of mastarbation which had a psychological effect on him. It was further stated that this had been later on cured in lrwin and Willingdon hospitals after marriage in the months of May to July. Letter, Exhibit P-B, which is addressed to the wife s father states that the sexual weakness which he had had been cured, and that this fact has been certified by the All India Institute of Medical Sciences. These two letters were admittedly written before the wife filed petition for annulment. The husband s evidence shows that the complaint of the wife regarding his mpotency had become known not only to the parents of the parties but also to the brother-hood. It was for that reason that the husband had got himself medically examined in order to satisfy his own father since his father was of the opinion that the wife could not accuse the husband of impotency unless there was a sexual weakness. The matter had. also been brought to the notice of brotherhood for reconciliation and at the instance of the brotherhood the husband got himself medically examined at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences on 30th July, 1969. The husband also admitted that he had been meeting the wife till July 11, 1970 at various restaurants. These facts clearly show that Exhibits P-A and P-B C were written by the husb