... 1 ... IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA. FIRST APPEAL NO.63 of 2004 Shri Vasant Atmaram Palyekar, son of Atmaram Palyekar, major of age, r/o House No.378,0 Kiranpani, Palye, Pednem, Goa. … Appellant v e r s u s Smt. Joshna alias Vijaya Vasant Palyekar, daughter of Sadanand Mayekar, major of age, r/o Police Housing Colony, Socorro road, Porvorim, Goa. … Respondent Mr. J. P. Mulgaonkar, Advocate for the appellant. CORAM: Shri A. H. JOSHI DATE: 27th JULY, 2009. JUDGMENT: 1. The appellant husband/original plaintiff has filed this appeal. 2. The appellant had filed a suit for ... 2 ... annulment of marriage and later by amending it as is argued he claimed decree of divorce on the ground of ill treatment. 3. No one appears for the respondent. Learned Advocate Shri Nigel Da Costa Frias who was appointed from Legal Aid has been discharged on his request since the client i.e. the respondent wanted to engage a private lawyer. She has however, failed to appear or engage any lawyer. 4. Heard learned Advocate Shri J. P. Mulgaonkar for the appellant. 5. In support of the plea that the respondent suffers from psychiatric disorder being schizophrenia, the appellant examined Dr.B. Cuncolienkar, Pw.3 and Dr. Gourish Naik Gaunekar, Pw.4. 6. In support of the plea of ill treatment, it is seen that the appellant examined ... 3 ... himself and his sister Asha Tirodkar. 7. From the evidence of Pw.3/Dr. Cuncolienkar it is seen that he claims to have treated the patient Joshna but he could not diagnose the disorder of the patient Smt. Joshna. He admits that he was not in charge of the hospital when Smt. Joshna was treated. In so far as Pw.4/Dr.Gaunekar is concerned, this witness also admits that he could not diagnose the illness of the patient Smt. Joshna. 8. It is thus clear that both these medical witnesses have come to the court to prove the case for annulment of the marriage of the appellant on the ground of psychiatric disorder does not stand. 9. Coming to the plea of ill treatment it is seen from what is stated in the examination-in-chief as supported by Pw.2, at the most constitutes facts which may be described as act of domestic friction ... 4 ... and non co-operation. 10. Considering the fact that Joshna was in need of some psychiatric treatment and assistance rather need support than a petition for divorce. In the background, she has suffered depression, she needed differential treatment at matrimonial home. 11. It is not the case of the appellant that any corrective measures were taken by the appellants for bringing her out of depression and irritation. 12. In any case appellant has no case to show that the judgment under appeal suffers from any illegality or error of appreciation of evidence. 13. The appeal has no merits and is dismissed with costs. A. H. JOSHI lh/.