X Vs. Y

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Two young medical graduates tied the knot with the hope that the bond between them would last for ever with love and joy. But, their hope did not last even the first night. For both, much anticipated wedding night was disappointing, if not pretty terrible ? the husband found the wife drowsy, lethargic, abnormal and not being excited as a normal newly wedded bride would be; the wife found the husband emotionless and suffering from erectile dysfunction. Initially, the couple lived together just for a week without consummation and left to their respective colleges where they were pursuing post graduation. After a short while, they stayed together for twenty five days. During this period, the marital feud existed between them was further intensified. They started living together two years thereafter on the husband completing his post graduation. By that time the gap between them was much widened; their relationship further deteriorated. The wife was still willing to patch up and continue the relationship, but the husband was not. Eventually, the spouses ended up initiating legal proceedings against each other ? the husband, for divorce and the wife, for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) The appellant and the respondent in both appeals are husband and wife respectively. They are doctors by profession. The appellant is a General Physician and the respondent is an Ophthalmologist. Their marriage was solemnized on 30/6/2008 at St.Martin De Pores Church, Palarivattom, Ernakulam as per the Christian religious rites. There are no issues in the wedlock.

(3.) The appellant filed Original Petition (OP No.1113/2012) against the respondent to declare his marriage with the respondent as null and void or, in the alternative, to pass a decree of dissolution of marriage. The respondent filed Original Petition (OP No.2091/2011) against the appellant seeking a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. Both original petitions were jointly tried by the court below. After trial, the Court below, by the impugned common order, dismissed the original petition filed by the appellant and allowed the original petition filed by the respondent granting her a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The appellant challenges both the orders in these appeals.