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

2000 Supreme(Ker) 61

ARIJIT PASAYAT, K.K.USHA, K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
Beena – Appellant
Versus
Varghese – Respondent


Judgment :-

Arijit Pasayat, C.J.

This is a reference under S.20 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (in short 'the Act'), seeking confirmation of the decree annulling the marriage between the petitioner (hereinafter referred to as the wife) and the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the husband)

2. Factual position as presented by parties, sans unnecessary details is as follows:-Wife filed the petition under S.18 of the Act for declaration of her marriage between the husband null and void. The marriage was solemnized in accordance with Christian religious rites at St. Antony's Church, Kurumpanadom on 11.9.1995. They lived together till 29.11.1995. At the time of marriage, wife was employed in Oman as a Staff Nurse. Eventhough they lived together till 29.11.1995, the marriage was not consummated on account of her husband's impotency. Though he was unable to perform sexual intercourse, he was not willing to consult a doctor. On 29.11.1995 she left for Oman and returned in October, 1996 on leave. The husband in the meantime secured a job in Saudi Arabia. The wife told the husband's relatives about the non-consummation of their marriage. Certain letters were also sent by her to the husba





















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top