Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

10. The only ground for annulment of the marriage being impotence of the appellant, the family Court framed an issue on this point and directed the appellant and the respondent to appear before the Medical Board for test about the impotence of the appellant. Accordingly, they appeared before the Medical Board where the respondent wife identified the appellant. The Board then directed the appellant to go through several tests and appear again before the Board with all the reports. But on the date so fixed for the tests, the appellant did not appear. The Board reported the matter to the Court.

15. The plea of the appellant that he could not afford to go to Kolkata due to financial reason was also rightly rejected by the learned trial Court for the reason that the appellant being a Class one gazetted officer is earning a handsome salary. Therefore, such a plea of financial predicament was not acceptable. This conduct of the appellant indicates that he was not interested to clear the charge coming from his own wife that he was sexual impotent. What is of material significance is that such charge came within few days after the marriage. The learned trial Court also noticed that the appellant tried to avoid tests even in the G.B. Hospital after his initial appearance before the Board. Only upon intervention of the Court, he had to appear later for the tests in the said hospital. According to the Medical Board two more tests by the expert of the SSKM Hospital, Kolkata were necessary to finally decide about the impotency and the reasons thereof. Taken together his reluctance for going through the tests in the GB Hospital and deliberate non-appearance before the expert in the SSKM Hospital, the learned trial Court has correctly drawn the adverse inference. The appellant was trying to avoid all such tests. As a result thereof, the decision of the trial Court went against

18. Mrs. Guha, learned Counsel for the respondent wife on the other hand made a strenuous argument to bring home her first point that it is explicit from the record itself that the appellant tried to avoid the tests in the G.B. Hospital, which unmistakably shows his disinclination to such tests. He being a highly educated person and a class one gazetted officer of the Government, it is unbelievable that he could not bear the expenses to visit Kolkata for the tests. Her further submission is that in such a case where a newly married wife makes an allegation that her husband is impotent, owing to which marriage could not be consummated,-the husband is expected to be eager and willing to take immediate initiative to face all necessary tests to disprove the allegation of the wife, if he is not really impotent. He would undoubtedly be slow, unwilling and disinterested to such tests if he is really impotent." Her next submission is that the allegation of the wife that her husband was impotent since before the marriage gets corroboration from the above conduct of the appellant himself showing his clear reluctance to face such tests. This conduct is bound to confirm the allegation of the wife respondent that because of the failure of her husband to perform any sexual act, not to speak of perfect coitus, she remained virgin which has been proved by the tests undertaken by the Medical Board of the G.B. Hospital, though copies of such reports are not readily available with her.