Judgment :- VENKATASWAMI, J. The husband is the petitioner in this case. He filed IDOP No. 248 of 1990 on the file of the Court of the District Judge, Coimbatore for dissolution of the marriage between himself and the respondent. 2. The petitioner has stated that the marriage between the parties had taken place on 19-8-1987 according to Christian rites. The petitioner further states that the respondent had been illtreating the petitioner, since the date of the marriage and because of her hostile attitude the marriage has not been consummated. He also states that the respondent has told him that she married the petitioner only to satisfy her parents, who compelled her to marry the petitioner. The petitioner further states that she is working at Ramakrishna Hospital as a nurse and she is still continuing her adulterous life with her pre-marital partner and finally left the matrimonial house in February, 1988. It appears that there was a panchayat before the Parish Priest and before him, they agreed to live separately under a document. The document also has been exhibited as Exhibit A. 2. The petitioner further states that from the date of the marriage, the petitioner and the respondent are living separately and the marriage was not consumated. 3. The respondent, notwithstanding the service of notice, remained ex parte. The petitioner was examined as P.W. 1. In chief-examination, he has stated that the respondent lived with him only for a month and there was no sexual intercourse during that period and that he saw the respondent in a compromising position with another even after the marriage. 4. The Court below, on a perusal of the pleadings and the evidence, found that there is no case for granting a decree u/ Ss. 18 and 19 of the Indian Divorce Act; but has granted a decree for dissolution of the marriage under Section 10 thereof, forgetting that the petitioner has not impleaded the alleged adulterer as a co-respondent as enjoined by Section 11 of the Indian Divorce Act. The ground, on which the Court below has granted a decree for divorce, was that the respondent was living in adultery. Such a decree cannot be granted without complying with the requirement of Section 11. Therefore, we are compelled to set aside the decree and remand the matter for fresh disposal. The ground, on which the Court below has granted a decree for divorce, was that the respondent was living in adultery. Such a decree cannot be granted without complying with the requirement of Section 11. Therefore, we are compelled to set aside the decree and remand the matter for fresh disposal. The Court below, after remand, will permit the petitioner, if he so chooses, to amend the petition and also to adduce both oral and documentary evidence. The Court below will dispose of the case within three months from the date of receipt of the order and the records. No costs. Order accordingly.