DELHI HIGH COURT
*Prakash Narain, Leila Seth, S. B. Wad, JJ.
Jecronimo Francisco Sacrafamilla Eric D'souza v. Florence Martha D' Souza nee Fernandes
Petition under S.18 and S.19 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. marriage details and context of dissolution. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petition details citing non-consummation. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court proceedings and ex parte situation. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. legal definitions of impotency regarding marital duties. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. lack of evidence about present impotency at petition time. (Para 9 , 10) |
| 6. case remanded for further evidence. (Para 11) |
1. The petitioner and the respondent are Christians professing the Roman Catholic Faith. They were married on February 20, 1971 in New Delhi. After marriage they resided together for a week in Delhi and then went to Goa to the house of the petitioner's parents. In Goa they stayed for about a month and then returned to Delhi. The petitioner had a house in old Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi and the parties lived there.
2. According to the petitioner the marriage was never consummated on account of a mental blockade which the respondent had. She allegedly told the petitioner that she cannot permit the petitioner to have sexual intercourse with her as she would suffer pain and was afraid of that. According to the petitioner he tried his best to persuade the respondent to have normal conjugal relations but failed in his attempts. The attitude of the respondent towards leading a normal married life was then allegedly discussed by the parties with the respondent's mother. She is also stated to have tried to persuade her daughter to lead a normal life and consummate the marriage but in vain. The petitioner states that respondent's mother even took the respondent to consult a doctor but the respondent's attitude did not change. In consequence, differences arose between the parties leading to the respondent finally leaving the matrimonial home in September 1973 to live with her mother at Pusa Road, New Delhi. The petitioner further states that in May 1974 the respondent addressed a letter to His Holiness Pope Paul VI for grant of a dispensation dissolving the marriage on the ground of non - consummation. The Church ordered an investigation on the representation moved by the respondent. As a result of that investigation the Church granted the prayer of the respondent and the marriage was dissolved. A communication to this effect was received by the petitioner from the Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Delhi in March 1975.
3. The petitioner contends that on account of the non - consummation of marriage due to the respondent's attitude and due to her admission that she did not want to have sexual intercourse with the petitioner as she had fear of pain as also because she had no love for him the respondent should be held to be impotent qua the petitioner. The petitioner also relies on an admission by the respondent that the marriage could not be consummated on account of her frigidity. Thus the petitioner filed a petition under S.18 and S.19 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 for a decree of dissolution of marriage. This petition was filed in March, 1978.
4. In the District Judge's court the petition was heard ex parte as the respondent did not put in appearance despite service. In support of the contentions in the petition the petitioner only examined himself as a witness. He did not produce any other evidence. He deposed that he was married according to the Christian rites in New Delhi on February 20, 1971. The marriage was never consummated. Initially the respondent expressed a fear that she will have pain on account of sexual intercourse. She would not even allow the petitioner to touch her. She had a mental blockade against sexual intercourse. The matter was discussed by the respondent with her mother in the petitioner's presence. Even the mother's persuasion had no effect. A doctor was consulted by the respondent along with her mother but there was no change. The respondent remained frigid and cold and finally left the matrimonial home in September 1973. She refused to come back and discharge her matrimonial obligations. The Church dissolved the marriage on the groun
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.