C RAJAMANI Vs. C RATHNA BAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant-husband filed a suit in O.M.S.No.50 of 1998 seeking dissolution of marriage between him and the respondent-wife on the ground of desertion and cruelty. THE applicant-husband files this application to permit the applicant to substitute the prayer as one for declaration that the marriage solemnized on 22.1.1981 is null and void as the same was vitiated by fraud.THE contention of the applicant:-

(2.) AFTER the marriage, the respondent never had menstrual cycle in a normal way. The applicant took the respondent to many hospitals and gave treatment to regulate her menstrual cycle. Even after removal of a cist in her uterus, she never had menstrual cycle. The applicant found that the respondent had not attained puberty before marriage and therefore, there was no formation of egg. The said fact was suppressed by the respondent and her parents and thereby they committed fraud on the applicant. During the course of cross-examination, the respondent deposed that she possessed medical certificate to show that she attained puberty and had menstrual cycle and she also got a certificate to demonstrate that she would be able to deliver a child. No certificate was produced before the court inspite of the letter given by the counsel for the applicant to produce the document. Therefore, the applicant files this application seeking amendment of the Original Matrimonial Suit as one for declaration that the marriage between the applicant and the respondent is null and void in the place of the prayer for divorce on the ground of cruelty and desertion.Counter version of the respondent:-

(3.) LEARNED counsel appearing for the respondent would vehemently contend that the prayer for substitution of the very relief sought for originally would materially change not only the foundation of the case laid by the applicant but also the cause of action alleged in the plaint. Nothing has been stated in the application as to when the applicant came to know that the respondent did not attain puberty. The application has been filed at the crucial stage of evidence only to further drag on the matter and to harass the respondent, he would contend.