Back
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
MOUSHUMI BHATTACHARYA, B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO
Harini Kanbham Keshava Moorthy – Appellant
Versus
Prasanth Kumar Vatti – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. appellant's marriage details and claims. (Para 1) |
JUDGMENT:
(per Justice B.R. Madhusudhan Rao)
1. The present Appeal is filed by the appellant/petitioner aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B. Nagar in FCOP.No.2536 of 2018, dated 28.05.2024.
2.1. Appellant is the petitioner/wife and the respondent is the husband. The case of the appellant is that her marriage with the respondent was performed on 11.12.2013 at APSRTC Kalyanamandapam, Baghlingampally, Hyderabad, on the same day the respondent failed to perform sexual intercourse. On 13.12.2013, they left for Honeymoon to Kerala, unfortunately during the 9 days trip, there was no sexual intercourse between them since the respondent is having erectile dysfunction. Respondent did not attempt to participate in the sexual intercourse with the petitioner. Appellant and the respondent went for second Honeymoon for 15 days to Kashmir, there also the respondent could not perform sexual activities.
2.2. Appellant has joined the respondent in USA in the month of March, 2015. Appellant came to know that erection deficiency is not cured and surgery is also failed. In the month
Impotence claims must be substantiated by credible evidence; absence of corroborating testimony and medical records led to dismissal of divorce appeal under Hindu Marriage Act.
Petitioner must prove respondent's continuous impotence for annulment under Section 12(1)(a); medical evidence showed both potent.
The burden of proof in cases of impotency, the significance of rebuttal evidence, and the error in dismissing a suit ex parte without proper consideration of evidence.
Marriage validity under the Indian Divorce Act hinges on accurate disclosure of personal information; established fraud must be proven to annul a marriage.
Unfounded allegations of impotency can constitute mental cruelty, warranting divorce under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
Consent obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation is void, allowing for a declaration of nullity of marriage and reliefs based on cruelty.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
