ORDER :- This is rather a peculiar case. The petitioner instituted an original petition for a declaration that her marriage with the respondent in this court was a nullity because of his impotency. A decree for nullity was eventually granted, but ex parte. The petitioner and her father had given evidence and there was also the report of the Medical examination of the respondent. That was the basis on which the ex parte decree was made. The respondent filed an application to set aside the ex parte decree, and at the same time, also filed an appeal from the order. The appeal had been withdrawn. But the court below has set aside the ex parte decree, it being of opinion that sufficient cause for the absence of the respondent was made out. In the meantime, relying upon the decree declaring the marriage to be a nullity, the petitioner contracted a second marriage. The petitioner pressed before the Court below that the respondent's application for setting aside the ex parte decree became for that reason infructuous. The Court below declined to accept that view.

2. In my view the Court below was right. But learned counsel for the petitioner refers me to Mohanmurari v. Kusumkumari,