THOMAS CHERIAN Vs. NISHA THOMAS FB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a reference under, S.20 of the Indian Divorce Act. The petition was filed by one Thomas Cherian alias Saji, who is the husband of the respondent, Mrs. Nisha Thomas. At the time when the petition was filed in the District Court by the husband on 25-9-1989 he was living at Kaloor in Cochin, while the respondent, his wife, was living in Switzerland.

(2.) The petitioner and the respondent were married on 10-9-1987 in India. Subsequently, they went to Kumarakom near Kottayam where it is said that the respondent persistently resisted sexual relationship. It is further alleged that even thereafter the respondent did not permit sexual intercourse. It is stated that the respondent used to speak very fervently of her love to Mr. Ottino, whom she told was her intimate friend. Subsequently, the respondent left for Switzerland on 20-9-1987 leaving the petitioner at Kaloor. It is the case of the petitioner that when she left for Switzerland, she promised that she would secure a job for the petitioner. As nothing happened thereafter, the petitioner himself went to Switzerland on 1-2-1988 and stayed there with the respondent for 21 days. It is stated that even there the respondent was sleeping in a separate bedroom, and did not permit any sexual advances. The petitioner then stated various acts of the respondent which made the petitioner to believe that she was impotent. The petitioner returned to India on 24-2-1988, and thereafter filed the present petition.

(3.) In the District Court, notice was issued to the respondent wife. The respondent entered appearance through counsel, but did not file any objection. She remained ex parte on 15-6-1990. Thereafter the petitioner adduced evidence as PW 1, and there was no evidence for the respondent. The learned District Judge came to the conclusion that the petitioner had made out a case that the respondent was impotent. A decree for nullity was passed on 22-6-1990 under S.19 of the Act, subject to confirmation by this Court under S.20. After the reference was made to this Court, as stated above, notice was issued to the respondent, and to the petitioner. The petitioner is appearing through Shri T.J. Thomas, Advocate and the respondent through Shri K.P. Sreekumar, Advocate.