The petitioner, Florence, had approached the court for the dissolution of
the union on the grounds of frequent beatings, threat to life and lack of care
for their children.
The 50-year-old trader and labourer told the court that her husband often
beat her whenever she comes home late from the market or construction sites.
She said the respondent, who was often drunk, was also not providing
food, care and education for the children.
The petitioner and mother of five said the apathy to the children’s
education had negatively impacted on them
She told the court that two of their daughters were impregnated while
sleeping in other people’s homes.
The petitioner appealed to the court to dissolve her 35-year-old marriage
with her husband as she could no longer cope with his attitude.
But the respondent, who is a retired transport driver, denied all the
allegations levelled against him by his wife.
The 75-year-old admitted fighting with his wife but added that he last
gave her a beating 20 years ago.
Ojo accused his wife of adultery while working as a labourer on a
construction site in Akure.
The respondent said inspite of
warning his wife against a
particular lover who she claimed was her employer, she still went ahead to
marry the man and had been living together in the last eight years.
He agreed that the union should be dissolved.
One of the witnesses and daughter of the respondent claimed that her
mother was lying.
She said while her parents were to blame in the crisis that had dogged
the marriage, the couple’s daughter said their father had been taking care of
them while he was healthy.
The daughter of the couple, however, appealed to the court to dissolve
the marriage to enable her father have peace
of mind.
The President of the court, Mrs Olayinka Akomolede, after hearing from
both parties, observed that the union had broken down irretrievably and
consequently dissolved the marriage.
She ruled that the last child of the couple, a 15-year- old, should
continue to stay with the respondent.
Akomolede ordered that the respondent should grant the petitioner access
to the child while she must notify him
before visiting the child.
0 Comments