The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to grant a decree of nullity under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, based on the impotency of a party and the lack of consummation of the marriage. Additionally, the judgment emphasizes the court's discretion in determining the amount of permanent alimony based on the income and social status of the parties involved.

JUDGMENT

Dr. B.R. Sarangi, J.

Against the judgment and decree dated 24.03.2012 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Cuttack in Civil Proceeding No. 815 of 2007 annulling the marriage by decree of nullity subject to payment of permanent alimony of Rs.5,00,000/- against the respondent-husband and directing to pay the said amount within three months, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant- wife.

2. The wife-appellant filed an application under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 admitting the marriage with the respondent-husband on 20.06.2007 as per the Hindu rites and customs at Cuttack. At the time of marriage, it is stated that her parents have gifted to her as well as the respondent-husband articles as per Scheduled-A of the petition. The appellant-wife also admitted that both the appellant and respondent were highly qualified at the time of marriage and she was serving as a Nursery Teacher at D.A.V. Public School, Shree Vihar Colony, Tulasipur, Cuttack and was getting a consolidated salary of Rs.5000/- and for the marriage, she left that job. The respondent has passed M.Sc. in Mathematics from IIT, Kanpur and has also done Post Graduate degree in Computer Science from Birla Institute of Technology and Science, Pilani, Rajastan. After completion of his study, he served as a software engineer for some time and thereafter opened his own software business at Delhi in the name and style of “Towards Vision Technology Private Limited” and from his business he is getting more than rupees one lakh per month. She further alleged that there has been no sexual cohabitation among them and therefore their marriage dated 20.6.2007 is voidable and is liable to be annulled by a decree of nullity. She has prayed that keeping in view her mental agony, life and future, the respondent-husband is liable to pay her a consolidated compensation of Rs.10,00,000/- and also liable to return all her articles as mentioned in scheduled-A of the petition.

3. The respondent-husband filed his written statement stating that after the marriage he never expressed his inability to perform sexual act with the appellant-wife. He alleged that the appellant-wife intentionally avoided to have sexual intercourse with him and always disliked him and humiliated him also. He further urged that no dowry had been given to him at the time of marriage and the description of articles mentioned in the scheduled-A of the petition is imaginary one, thereby her request to return the articles cannot be allowed. He further vehemently urged that under the matrimonial law there is no payment of compensation and as such, the appellant is not entitled to get such relief. According to him, the appellant-wife being a working lady having sufficient means, the prayer for decree of nullity annulling the marriage dated 20.6.2007 has to be unconditional.

4. In order to substantiate the contention, the appellant-wife has examined two witnesses, namely, P.W.1, she herself and P.W.2, her mother, Krishna Roychoudhury, whereas the respondent-husband has examined one witness, namely, O.P.W.1, he himself. The appellant, has relied upon the document, marked as Exts. 1 to 7 and 7/a, whereas the respondent relied upon the documents, marked as Exts. A to E.

5. From the materials available on record, it is found that after the marriage was solemnized, both the appellant and respondent went to the house of the respondent at Hazaribag, Jharkhand but in the fourth night their marriage could not be consummated as respondent-husband did not establish physical relationship with the appellant-wife on that night. They stayed at Hazaribag from 22.6.2007 to 11.7.2007 in the house of the respondent-husband along with other family members and during the said period there was no physical relationship among them. However, the appellant-wife came to know from his family members that the respondent-husband is very shy and due to such shyness he was hesitant to keep physical relationship with her