Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. Learned counsel for the appellant has placed reliance on two cases; one is G. v. G. 1924 AC 349 and G. v. G., 1912 PD 173. In the case G. v. G. 1912 PD 173 the husband filed a petition for nullity on the ground of his wife's impotency. She denied the fact that she was frigid. She rather alleged that the husband was incapable and has never consummated the marriage. She also asked for a decree of nullity. It was admitted in this case that the marriage had not been consummated. The Court held, without going to the question as to who was the guilty party that it was evident that the marriage has not been consummated and could not have been consummated in future also, The Court annulled the marriage for the reason that it was satisfied that "quoad hanc et quoad hunc". The Court further observed that the two people should not be tied up together for the rest of their lives in a state of misery. The position in the case before me is entirely different. Sumitra has not appeared nor is there any allegation on her part that her husband was impotent and the marriage was not consummated on account of her husband's fault. Whereas in the case referred to above it was both the parties alleging impotency of each other and claimed a decree of nullity.

11. In Smt. Shantibai v. Tarachand, AIR 1966 Madh Pra 8, the parties lived in the same house for several months. But they did not have any sexual intercourse at all. It was admitted that the marriage was not consummated. The wife was medically examined. She was found to be normal ,and fit for copulation. The medical examination of the husband as well showed that he was well developed and was capable of performing sexual intercourse. It was in these circumstances that it was inferred that the wife was frigid and impotent vis-avis her husband.