Achhe Vakil

Rishta todne ko tyaar h ...
But ko nhi .

Wife's chewing to***co Habit not sufficient for divorce: Bombay high court
" Habit of chewing to***co/kharra, which alone is not sufficient to grant a decree of divorce" Ruled, The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court while dismissing a petition filed by a Husband against the family court's Judgment and decree.
A division bench comprising justices Atul Chandurkar and Pushpa Ganediwala was hearing a plea filed by a husband against the family court's Judgment and decree. Family court dismissed a petition of the husband, for decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
The marriage between the appellant/husband and the respondent/wife was solemnised on 15/06/2003 at Nagpur. Out of the said wedlock, the couple is blessed with one son and one daughter.
Petitioner stated that, She was addicted to chewing to***co and therefore she had developed a cyst in her stomach. The appellant husband had to incur huge medical expenses for her treatment.
The respondent/wife, in her written statement, denied all the adverse allegations of cruelty.She also made allegations with regard to demand of two wheeler from her parents by the appellant/husband, and on that count, he gave beating to her.
She 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:
"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."
"Since the respondent/wife was having a habit of chewing to***co,he was required to spend lot of money for her medical treatment.However, the learned trial Court has rightly observed that he failed to bring on record the medical papers and bills in support of this pleading."