SUNIL K MIRCHANDANI Vs. REENA S MIRCHANDANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition filed by the petitioner Sunil K. Mirchandani, it is prayed that decree of nullity of marriage solemnised between the petitioner and the respondent on 28-11-1993 be passed in his favour.

(2.) SUNIL K. Mirchandani (the petitioner) married Reena Sunil Mirchandani (the respondent) on 28-11-1993 at St. John Baptist Church, Thane. At the time of the marriage the petitioner, 36 years old, was divorced from his earlier wife and the respondent, 30 years old, was a spinster. The parties knew each other for about 2? years prior to the marriage. The respondent inserted an advertisement in the newspaper for a suitable match to which the petitioner responded and both of them met. Though the respondents father had died two years prior to the meeting of the parties, it is the case of the petitioner that she lied that her father was alive and practising and when she came over to his house she stated that her father had died several years ago. According to the husband, his father did not accept the match because of the said lie by the wife but since both of them were interested in getting married, they continued to meet each other. He was in love with her and ultimately his mother agreed to the match and thereafter marriage took place on 28-11-1993. The next day after the marriage both of them left for honeymoon to Goa. It is the case of the petitioner that the marriage was not consummated at all and whenever he approached the respondent and made advances she would say that she was missing her dog, some time she would say "i want my brother". He thought that the respondent was away from her family for the first time in her life and therefore, may be missing them. He decided to be patient and win over her slowly. But more patience he showed, more adamant she became and whenever he approached or made advances to her, she would brush away him under some pretext or the other. The petitioners case is that his flat, namely flat No. 3, Sun Beam, Peddar Road, Mumbai is one room rented flat. The said flat was taken on rent by his father and after his death it stands in the name of his mother. His mother is about 70 years old. She is ailing and not keeping good health. But despite that she used to get up early and give the petitioner and the respondent bed tea and breakfast and cook all the meals. The petitioner and his mother initially believed that the respondent would adjust herself and take care of the household. To give privacy to the petitioner and the respondent, the bed room being large was partitioned. According to the petitioner, the respondent did not take any interest in the house hold work and even when his mother was seriously ill and bedridden, she even did not make a cup of tea. When his mother was not in a position to cook the food due to her illness, she (the mother) would order tiffins for them. On 24-4-1994 the respondent left the matrimonial home permanently. The petitioner says that throughout the said time he made several attempts to consummate the marriage but the respondent wilfully refused to allow the petitioner to consummate the marriage and on every occasion pretended to be sad and upset. On one occasion, she stated that the petitioner should be subjected to A. I. D. S. test and further taunted that he cannot get erection. He was shocked and surprised at such false allegations of the respondent. On one of the occasions the respondent told him that he should get rid of his mother and put her in old peoples home. The respondent would abuse the mother of the petitioner and even call her a prostitute. She would call his house a brothel. The petitioner tried to reason with the respondent but did not succeed. The petitioner requested the wife to return to home by letter dated 24-4-1994 but she did not respond immediately and on 3-6-1994 he received the letter dated 1-6-1994 from the respondent, contents of which were not wholly correct. It is the case of the petitioner that he is not in a position to acquire separate accommodation or to leave his mother alone. In substance, the annulment of marriage is sought on the ground of non-consummation of marriage.

(3.) THE respondent has filed the reply/written statement and has denied that the marriage was not consummated. The respondent has averred in the written statement that the allegations made in the petition that whenever the husband approached her or made advances, she would brush away him under one pretext or the other are all tissues of lies. She has stated that she was doing all sort of work in the house when her mother-in-law was ill but despite that her mother-in-law used to treat her very cruelly. All allegations made in the petition about her behaviour have been denied.