Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

v. Appellant made false allegations against her to cover up his lacuna and to take away her properties.

vi. She never stated before the mediators or relatives that the appellant is impotent. He himself told that he is suffering from partial 'erectile dysfunction' and would be cured by treatment. Appellant did not care her request to get treatment.

vii. She is always willing to join the company of the appellant to lead happy marital life without any condition. She has resigned her job on KL,J&SKS,J 17.11.2014 on the force of her husband and his family members.

20. During cross examination, appellant (PW-1) further admitted that according to him, marriage was consummated immediately, but as per the respondent, it was little later. Respondent never stated to him that the marriage was not consummated, similarly regarding the alleged impotency. However, he has denied a suggestion that even as per the respondent, there was a small issue of erectile dysfunction, it was rectified. He went through the tests prescribed by Dr. Anitha on 09.09.2014 at Vijaya Diagnostic centre. He attended to the tests on first KL,J&SKS,J day and he did not attend other two days. He has confronted the CC copy of prescription dated 08.09.2014 of Anitha Nursing Home on his name, but on perusal of the same, he denied. He further admitted that in the voice message i.e., Ex.A6, he understood the word "weakness" as his alleged impotency.

39. In her counter, she has mentioned that from the beginning of the marriage, appellant was suffering erectile dysfunction. The appellant has love and affection towards his sisters so also his sisters have great love and KL,J&SKS,J affection towards the appellant. Therefore, she has discussed the said issue with 5th sister and her husband i.e., PW-4 and PW-5. She has disclosed that appellant had problem during first night and requested his brother- in-law Subash to take the appellant to doctor. She did not mention about the said fact in her counter or in her examination in chief.

51. According to the respondent, Appellant suffered erectile dysfunction for some time and thereafter it was cured. Respondent specifically contended that the marriage was consummated. She has petty issues with her mother-in-law.

52. Thus, though the appellant examined PWs-2 to 5, he failed to prove the same. The only serious allegation made by him is that respondent started propagating in the society that appellant is an impotent. Respondent denied the said fact. According to her, appellant is suffering with erectile dysfunction and nerves weakness for some time. Thereafter, there was no problem. It is curable. However, she has not disclosed the said fact to anybody. Therefore, the evidence of PW-4 and PW-5 is not useful to prove the said allegation.