(1.) JUDGMENT passed by learned Subordinate Judge, Puri in O. S. No. 39/83 of 1986/82 is the subject matter of challenge in both the appeals though on different grounds. The suit was filed by Jagadananda Mishra, appellant in F. A. No. 70 of 1993 purportedly under Sections 13 and 14 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (in short, the 'act'), praying for dissolution of his marriage with Pravati, appellant. In F. A. No. 245 of 1991, by passing a decree of divorce, on the ground that Pravati was of subnormal state of mind which was incurable in nature. His case synoptically is as follows :
(2.) A joint written statement was filed by Pravati and Kamalakanta. They denied the allegations regarding mental disorder of Pravati. It was averred that Pravati suffered from no mental disorder, but she has subnormal intelligence to a minor degree on account of the fact that she had no schooling in her childhood due to her affliction with a viral disease known as Encephalitis. Family members of Jagadananda knew about Pravati's subnormal state of mind as they had no several occasions visited the house of Kamalakanta, and had seen her many times. Question of suppressing Pravati's mental disorder did not arise. It was further stated that Pravati never refused to have sexual intercourse with Jagadananda, she was very much capable of having sexual intercourse, and in fact had it with Jagadananda on many occasions. There was no substance in the charge of cruelty, as alleged. It was alleged that with a view to extract dowry to the extent of rupees one lakh after marriage, which was not acceptable by Kamalakanta, the petition has been falsely filed. A prayer was made for return of certain articles as described in Schedule 'a' of the written statement, cash of Rs. 12,000/- which was paid, and other articles as described in schedule 'b'. A prayer for maintenance Rs. 500/- per month to Pravati, as she has no source of income.
(3.) LEARNED Subordinate Judge framed four issues. Vital issues are as follows :