An Upper Area Court in Kubwa, Abuja, Federal Capital Territory (FCT), has dissolved the 16-year-old marriage between a woman, Hajarat Isa and her husband, Muhammed Hassan, for lack of love.
The judge, Mohammed Wakili dissolved their marriage according to Islamic Law, following Hajarat’s prayer for divorce on the said ground.
Wakili ordered that the divorce certificate be issued to the plaintiff, adding that she would not observe “Iddah” because the couple had not copulated since 2022.
Iddah is a three-month waiting period to be observed before contracting another marriage.
Earlier, the petitioner, a mother of four, had told the court that she got married to the respondent under Islamic law in 2008.
She said that she was no longer interested in their marriage and prayed that the court grants her request for divorce on grounds of lack of love.
The respondent, however, said that he divorced his wife and remarried her in 2022 which was in his absence because he travelled to his hometown while the marriage was contracted.
“I will grant her divorce, but want her to return all my belongings in her possession.
“She sold my television, a play station I bought for the children, and my clothes and shoes.
“We have not consummated the marriage since 2022, and I gave her a shop and capital to start up a business before I travelled.
“When I got back, she sold my gym equipments,” he said.
The plaintiff said that in 2022, the respondent travelled to his hometown for one year and seven months and only sent money once in a while.
“I was the only one taking care of our four children and two more he had with his ex-wife.
“I sold the said items to take care of our children. I am a private teacher and was paid only N15,000 when he left.
“I later fell sick and that was when he returned.
“My younger brother had to come to help me with the children while my elder sister took care of me,” she said.
She added that she did not sell his gym pieces of equipment but had explained to him that they got stolen and the reason she sold other items was for upkeep.
The respondent however told the court that he believed the plaintiff may have sold the items for upkeep while he was away and forgave her for it.
(Photo illustration courtesy of Saturday Tribune)
