Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

3. The Respondent-husband claimed that the Appellant-wife had agreed to stop working in shifts and instead work during regular office hours. However, after marriage she refused to alter her work schedule. The Respondent-husband claimed that the Petitioner-wife was frigid and psychologically impotent. The Respondent-husband further claimed that the Appellant-wife had given in writing that she did not have any objections if he had affair with or marries any other girl and that she displayed total lack of interest and indifference towards him.

b) The inference drawn by the learned Judge on the basis of the writing at Exhibit-16 that the Appellant-wife was avoiding physical relations with the Respondent-husband is totally erroneous.

c) The learned Judge has failed to consider that the marriage was consummated and a child was born in the wedlock. Therefore, the finding that the Appellant-wife was frigid and psychologically impotent are totally contrary to the evidence on record.

15. Now reverting to the facts of the present case the main grievance of the Respondent-husband was that the Appellant-wife was frigid and psychologically impotent and that she deprived him of pleasures of marital life. It is pertinent to note that the Appellant-wife and the Respondent-husband were married in the year 1988. Their marriage was consummated and they were blessed with a son on 19.6.1989. Therefore, the contention of the Respondent-husband that the Appellant-wife was frigid and psychologically impotent needs to be rejected outright.

Megha fca_183_2008.doc

16. It is pertinent to note that the Appellant-wife had categorically denied the allegations of frigidity and impotency. The learned Judge discarded the defence and accepted the case of Respondent-husband, mainly on the basis of the writing at Exhibit-16 wherein the Appellant-wife had stated that she had no objection if the Respondent-husband had affair with any girl or if he married any girl or all of them.