J.M.Tandon, J. - (1.) THIS is an appeal filed by Roshan Lal appellant against the order of Additional district Judge, Jullundur, dated February 3, 1978, dismissing his petition for annulment of his marriage with the respondent under section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter called the Act) and in the alternative for is solution of his marriage by a decree of divorce under section 13 of the Act.
(2.) THE parties were admittedly married on May 5, 1975, and the respondent gave birth to a female child on February 24, 1976. On September 20. 1976, the appellant filed the petition for annulment of his marriage with the respondent and in the alternative for dissolution of their marriage by a decree of divorce on the ground that she had been subject to recurrent attacks of epilepsy prior to the marriage and continued to suffer therefrom after marriage. The respondent in her written statement denied that she suffered from epileptic attacks. The learned trial Judge framed the following issues: - - 1. Whether there was consent of the petitioner to marry the respondent with fraud ? 2. Whether the respondent is suffering from epilepsy ? 3. Whether the petitioner is entitled to a decree of divorce on account of the respondent's suffering from epilepsy ? 3.WHETHER the Court at Jullundur has jurisdiction to hear this petition ? 4.RELIEF . Under issue No. 4, the trial Court found that the court at Jullundur had jurisdiction to hear the petition. It was further held under issue No. 2 that the respondent suffered from epilepsy but not since before marriage. It being the case, he was not entitled to a decree of divorce under Section 13 of the Act. The finding under issues Nos. 1 and 3 was also returned against the appellant and his petition was dismissed. It is against this order that the present appeal has been directed.
(3.) The learned counsel for the appellant has not pressed the case for divorce under section 13 of the Act. In other words, the finding of the learned trial Court that the appellant is not entitled to a decree of divorce under section 13 of the Act on the ground that the respondent is suffering from epilepsy since after the marriage has not been challenged.;