Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

2. Nothing shall be pleaded in answer to a petition for restitution of conjugal rights which shall not be a ground for judicial separation or for nullity of marriage or for divorce.

19. The argument advanced by Mr. Kacker, the learned counsel for the petitioner, is that since under Section 12(1)(a) of the Act impotency of the petitioner can be a ground for annulment of the marriage only when it is proved that the petitioner was impotent at the time of the marriage and continued to be so until the institution of the proceeding, the petition for restitution of conjugal rights cannot be dismissed unless impotency until the institution of the proceeding is also proved. The argument obviously assumes that the evidence led by the respondent is inadequate for establishing that the petitioner continued to be impotent until the institution of the proceedings, although the courts below have recorded a finding to that effect. According to the learned counsel, Subsection (2) of Section 9 of the Act defines what would he 'reasonable excuse' within the meaning of Sub-section (1) of Section 9 and precludes the Court from refusing restitution of conjugal rights on a ground not covered by Sub-section (2). This does not, however, appear to me to be the true and proper construction of the provisions of Section 9.