Ibadan, Feb. 16, 2024 (NAN) A herbalist, Kasali Yinusa, has pleaded with a Mapo Grade ‘A’ Customary Court in Ibadan to dissolve his nine year-old union with his estranged wife, Abosede, on the grounds that her adulterous lifestyle was negatively affecting their daughter.
Yunusa accused Abosede of being short tempered, fighting every now and then with people in the neighbourhood.
“I’m most unhappy with the high level of immorality Abosede has impacted on our only child. Since Abosede and the child no longer stay with me, I notice that the child exhibits some bad manners whenever she visits me.
”Abosede is too wasteful. I stock up her shop with goods but at the end of the sales, she squanders the proceeds,” he alleged.
The petitioner consequently begged to be given custody of the child.
However, Abosede did not comment on most of the contending issues raised by the petitioner.
Abosede, who is a trader, pointed out that her husband never played the role of a good father.
”He refuses to pay our child’s school fees. In fact, that was the reason why I started going to church, seeking divine intervention.
”He gets angry whenever my baby sings church hymns. My lord, whenever Yinusa demands money from me and I’m unable to provide it, he beats me up.
Read Also: Senate: Some Nigerians in mining sector colluding with foreigners to rip off country
“Also, I am the sixth wife in his home. He married another woman when I was three months pregnant.”
Delivering judgment, the court’s President, Mrs S.M. Akintayo, held that there was no marriage to be dissolved between Yinusa and Abosede because their union did not observe traditional laws.
”None of the parties stated that there was payment of bride price and giving of gifts which are essential requirements before a traditional marriage can be considered as valid.
”The fact that a man and a woman lived together and had children does not mean that they are married,” she held.
Akintayo granted custody of the seven-year-old child to Abosede because she was in a better position to cater for her.
The judge granted the order restraining the respondent from harassing, intimidating and interfering in the personal life of the petitioner henceforth.