K LATA ALIAS RAMA Vs. KALVA DAMODHAR REDDY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The short but interesting question that arises in this Civil Miscellaneous Appeal directed against the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Karimnagar, in O.P.No. 38 of 1969 allowing the application filed by the respondent herein under Section l,2(l)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for annulment of his marriage with the appellant, is whether the appellant is an 'idiot' within the meaning of that expression occuiting in Section 5(ii) of the Act.

(2.) The facts necessary for consideration of the question involved are the following : The marriage between the appellant and the respondent was in May, 1966 at Jammikunta, a village in Karimnagar District. The next day after the marriage, the appellant was brought to the house of the respondent in another village and it was discovered by him that his wife was unable to understand or answer even simple questions and was "mentally very weak". The appellant went back again to her parent's place and the next visit, to her husband's house was in Septeraber, 1966. On this occasion the respondent noticed his wife finding it difficult even to dress herself, in addition, he noticed the appellant beating her head against the walls of the house and breaking her bangles and not having her meals at regular times or intervals. On enquiries, it is his case that he learned that the abnormal or strange behaviour of his wife was due to her being an 'idiot' from her childhood and suppressing that fact, her parents brought about the marriage.

(3.) Every allegation made by him is denied by the father of the appellant in the counter filed by him as the guardian of his minor daughter aged 17, The appellant's case is that she is as normal as any other human being and that she also went through the consummation ceremony after the marriage. According to her, it is her husband and his parents that started ill-treating her by making baseless allegations about her so called sub normal mental faculties and that no kind of fraud was played by her parents in bringing about the marriage, between her and the respondent.