Mental cruelty must reflect a sustained pattern of behavior making cohabitation intolerable, assessed within the full context of the marriage.

JUDGMENT :

B.R.MADHUSUDHAN RAO, J.

The Appellant-wife has preferred the instant Appeal aggrieved by the order, dated 03.11.2022 in O.P.No.778 of 2017 passed by I Additional Family Court at Hyderabad, whereby the Divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 10 (iv) (x) of Indian Divorce Act, 1869 (for short ‘the Act’) was allowed.

2. The factual background of the case is as follows:

2.1. The respondent-husband has initially filed O.P. under Section 10 (iv) of the Act that his marriage was performed with the appellant-wife on 29.12.2010 as per Christian Rules and Customs. He alleged that on the first night of the marriage, he noticed white patches on the lips and body of the appellant-wife, when the respondent-husband ascertained with the appellant-wife about the white patches on her lips and body, she informed that they were sun burns. It is further alleged in the petition that in the month of January, 2012, the respondent-husband requested the appellant-wife to visit a Doctor and get treatment. Whenever there was a quarrel, the appellant-wife used to do Caste differentiation by saying that the respondent-husband belongs to labour class. After shifting to Hyderabad, the respondent-husband insisted the appellant-wife for sex, then he noticed that the white patches increased in his wife’s body and he was scared to see that the patches were spreading on her body parts. The respondent-husband has informed his in-laws about the white patches but they ignored. In the month of July, 2011, respondent-husband came to know that the appellant-wife was suffering with Vitiligo. Vitiligo is a disease in which the pigment of the cells of the skin are destroyed in certain areas and there is no cure for Vitiligo. They lived together till September, 2011, thereafter the appellant-wife went for training and she was promoted and transferred to Guntur and resided there at till September, 2013. The respondent-husband was at Hyderabad till June, 2014 and thereafter he got transferred to Bangalore in June, 2014 and resided there at and prayed to grant divorce.

2.2. Appellant-wife filed counter to the main O.P. admitting the marriage and contended that there were no white patches on her body in 2012, initially it was diagnosed with Vitiligo in June, 2013, she had very small white patches on her wrist and the area between her right hand thumb and fore finger. Vitiligo is not a contageous disease and there is no definite factor for the cause of it. The appellant-wife never refused to have sex with her husband, but it is her husband who did not show interest to have the same. Appellant-wife contacted the sister of the respondent-husband who resides in Hyderabad in May, 2015 and they went to Bangalore to settle the issue, then the husband started saying that he would start living with her only if she stops all her communication with her parents and siblings, he also warned her that if she don’t get pregnant by January, 2016 he will divorce her, he always used to say that he was the one having difficulties in getting pregnant. In January, 2016 appellant-wife visited her husband at Bangalore by which time her Vitiligo became prominent. Respondent- husband came to Hyderabad in January, 2017, to take back his belongings from her. In August, 2017, she came to know about the divorce notice. The question of suppression of disease by the appellant and her parents will not arise at all as she did not have the same till June, 2013.

2.3. Respondent-husband has amended the O.P. and incorporated Sub-clause (x) of Divorce Act vide IA.No.789 of 20