Last Updated on June 7, 2021 by Administrator
In Borivli Madras, a 38-year-old wife, filed for divorce in a civil court to annul her marriage of one year claiming her husband’s alleged impotency as the ground for the same.
The wife’s claim of husband’s impotence was inferred by the Civil Court in an adverse manner, as the doctor failed to produce a medical certificate asserting the claim of potency by the husband, the court concluded that the husband is in fact ‘impotent’.
The husband moved to the District Court and his plea was accepted in 2018. The Court directed a Civil Surgeon to collect evidence of husband’s alleged impotency. This order of the court was challenged through a petition filed by the wife in the Bombay High Court.
The wife in her petition contended that since the case reached the District Court through an appeal, it would amount to the appellate stage and hence, the court cannot take additional evidence at this stage. the additional evidence in this case being the impotency test.
Justice Sambre presiding over the case at Bombay High Court ruled that the husband is very much allowed to tender evidence in his favor, even at the appellate stage.
The husband went with the necessary medical examination and turned in his reports at the District Court.