Grade A Customary Court, Court 2, sitting at Mapo, Ibadan, Oyo State, has given judgement on the divorce suit brought before it by a man, Hakeem, against his wife, Idayat, whom he accused of being aggressive and disrespectful to his family members, friends and neighbours.
Hakeem explained that his family members and friends had deserted him because of his wife’s hostile nature.
Hakeem stated that Idayat turned their home into a battlefield.
According to him, she always refused his first wife and her children entrance into his apartment and would fight them if they insisted on having their way.
He said Idayat never ceased to threaten and fight him, thus making life unbearable for him.
The plaintiff said that the defendant always chased him about with a cutlass any time they had an altercation and would swear to k!ll him.
Hakeem added that he left home when it was obvious that his life was no longer safe with his wife, but that his wife still did not relent in fighting him anytime their paths crossed.
In addition to divorce, Hakeem sought an order restraining his wife from threatening and interfering with his private life and further pleaded for their children’s custody.
Hakeem, in his evidence, said, “I met my wife 20 years ago, and we held an introduction ceremony after we had courted for a few months. I did not pay her bride price. My lord, my only regret in life is that I got married to my wife. I started seeing a new side of her after we started living together as husband and wife.
“My wife turned our home upside down and made my life miserable. She is unfriendly and unkind to my relatives and friends. Our neighbours also did not find a friend in her.
“My wife always refused my first wife and her children access to me. She always stopped them from entering my apartment and would fight them if they insisted on having their way. My wife and I were always at loggerheads because of her hostility.
“She held no respect for me and would always argue with me and on many occasions fight me. She would threaten and swear to k!ll me. My wife was in the habit of chasing me about with a cutlass and swearing that she would k!ll me. I left the house because I feared she could make her threat real.
“My wife still refused to let me have rest of mind. She would accost me anytime our paths crossed and fight me. My lord, I came to court because my wife has made my life miserable enough. I plead that the court end our relationship and restrain her from threatening and interfering with my private life.
“I further entreat the court for our children’s custody. She has never been a good example to them.”
However, Idayat denied all the allegations brought against her.
She also refused that their marriage be dissolved, giving the welfare of their children as an excuse.
According to her, she was the one solely responsible for their children’s welfare.
She pleaded that the court mandate her husband to pay the amount of N70,000 per month for the feeding of their four children and make him also responsible for their education and health care.
“It is true that my husband and I held no wedding ceremony, and he did not pay my bride price. My lord, I do not want to divorce, nor do I want my husband to have custody of our four children because they are still young,” she said.
“Moreover, I have been responsible for their feeding and education. He pays them little or no attention. If the court rules in my husband’s favour, then I entreat the court to mandate him to pay N70,000 monthly for the feeding of the four and also be responsible for their education and health care.”
The court president, Mrs O.E. Owoseni, giving her judgement, said that there was no marriage to be dissolved because no customary marriage was held between the two.
She further stated that the evidence of threat was not disputed or challenged by the defendant, which, according to her, was tantamount to admission of all the claims.
Owoseni gave an order restraining the defendant from threatening and interfering with the plaintiff’s private life premised on the defendant’s admission to the threat of the plaintiff’s life and incessant fights even after the plaintiff had left home.
She granted the defendant custody of their children and the plaintiff reasonable access to them.
The plaintiff was ordered to be responsible for their upkeep, giving adequate attention to their feeding, education, and health care.
