SRINIVASAN, J.

This matter comes for confirmation of decree, declaring the marriage between the petitioner and, the respondent, which took place on 4-2-1987 as null and void.

2. In the original petition the petitioner has stated that after the marriage was performed on 4-2-1987, there was no sexual relationship between him and the respondent. On 8-2-1987, she agreed for consummation, but the petitioner was shocked to find that she was affected by leucoderma and there was no consummation on that day also. When he questioned her, the respondent said that her parents would have disclosed that fact prior to the marriage. The respondent left the house with all her belongings. She sent a notice on 11-8-1988 through a lawyer to the petitioner informing him that a female child was born to her on 6-11-1987 and called upon the petitioner to lead marital life along with her. The petitioner sent a reply stating that he had no sexual relationship with her and he could not be made responsible for the child born to her. According to him, the birth of the child shows that the respondent is living in adultery. But the petitioner has not chosen to mention the name of any person with whom t