RAMAKRISHNAN, J. :- This case came before this Court on an earlier occasion and our decision has been reported in Jayaraj v. Seeni Ammal, AIR 1967 Mad 242. The reference arose out of a petition under Section 18 of the Indian Divorce Act, by the husband for a declaration of nullity in respect of the marriage between him and his wife, Mary Seeniammal, on the substantive ground that the wife declined all access to the husband subsequent to the marriage and refused to consummate the marriage and hence must be regarded as impotent both at the time of the marriage and at the time of the institution of the proceedings. When the matter came before this Court on the earlier occasion this Court found that sufficient evidence had not been adduced for the purpose of proof of the alleged impotency, and after setting out the relevant principles, this Court remanded the matter to the lower Court for disposal after a fresh evidence.

2. After the remand, the learned District Judge took a great deal of trouble to secure the presence of the wife, before him for examination in Court. She appears to have responded only after a warrant of arrest had been issued, and then she appeared through cou