Wife's Habit Of Chewing Tobacco Not Sufficient To Grant A Decree Of Divorce: Bombay High Court

Noting that if the marriage is dissolved, the children would suffer a great loss, the Bench of Justice Pushpa V. Ganediwala and Justice A. S. Chandurkar ruled that no case is made out by the appellant/husband to disturb the well-reasoned findings of the trial Court.

The facts in brief

One Shankar (appellant/husband) preferred an appeal against the judgment and decree dated 21^st January 2015 passed by the Family Court, Nagpur, whereby the petition of the husband, for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, was dismissed.

The marriage between the appellant/husband and the respondent/wife was solemnized on 15^th June 2003 at Nagpur and the couple has one son and one daughter.

Among other things, it was stated that she was addicted to chewing tobacco and therefore she had developed a cyst in her stomach and the appellant-husband had to incur huge medical expenses for her treatment.

Lastly, it was stated that on 17^th January 2012, she left the company of the appellant/husband, as she was not interested to cohabit with him.

On the other hand, the respondent/wife, in her written-statement denied all the adverse allegations of cruelty pleaded by the appellant/husband and pleaded about some instances of mental and physical harassment meted out to her at the hands of the appellant/husband and her mother-in-law.

He also stated that there was a demand of two-wheeler from her parents by the appellant/husband, and on that count, he gave beating to her.

The respondent/wife further alleged that in the year 2008, even though the appellant/husband was suffering from the disease H.I.V., she did not leave his company, however, as she was receiving continuous ill-treatment at the hands of her in-laws, she was constrained to leave the company of the appellant/husband.

Court's observations

At the outset, the Court observed,

"A careful perusal of the pleadings and the evidence in support as adduced by the appellant/husband, would at once reveal that the allegations with regard to cruelty as set out by the appellant/husband, are nothing but the normal wear and tear in married life."

The Court also remarked,

"The allegations that she was not doing household work, quarreling with his family members without any reason, visiting her parental home without his permission, not preparing his tiffin etc., in the considered view of this Court, are not sufficient to form any opinion that the appellant/husband is undergoing acute mental pain, agony, suffering, disappointment and frustration and therefore it is not possible for him to live in the company of the respondent/wife."

The Court also noted that when the appellant/husband was detected with HIV positive, the respondent/wife stayed with the appellant/husband till 2010.

Regarding Husband's claim that cost was incurred on the medical treatment of his wife (on account of her tobacco habit), the Bench noted,

"The trial Court has rightly observed that he failed to bring on record the medical papers and bills in support of this pleading."

Lastly, the Court said,

"Apart from this, it is rightly held by the learned trial Court that the pleadings of the appellant/husband are not so grave and weighty so as to dissolve the marriage."

In the given facts, the Court was of the opinion that no case was made out by the appellant/husband to disturb the "well-reasoned findings" of the trial Court.

The appeal, thus, being devoid of merits was dismissed.

Case title – Shankar v. Rina [Family Court Appeal No. 70 Of 2016]

Click Here To Download Judgment

Read Judgment