Mamle Vrs Narh [2022] GHADC 98 (20 October 2022)

IN THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE COURT HELD AT SOMANYA ON THURSDAY THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2022 BEFORE HIS WORSHIP MICHAEL DEREK OCLOO. SUIT NO: A4/48/2022 AKWETEH VICTORIA MAMLE PETITIONER VRS ABRAHAM NANOR NARH RESPONDENT PETITIONER PRESENT RESPONDENT ABSENT JUDGEMENT The Petitioner commenced the instant action against the Respondent for the following reliefs: 1. An order of the court to dissolve the marriage between her and the Respondent. 2. An order of the court to cancel the marriage certificate No. COP/0033325 and license No. SDMC/244/18 issued to the parties by the church of Pentecost, Mampong. 3. Recovery of GH₵9,000.00 which the Petitioner gave to the Respondent as financial assistance which Respondent has failed to pay. 4. An order of the court for the Respondent to maintain their only child at GH₵500.00 per month and also pay the child’s school fees as and when it is due. The Respondent was unable to come to court as an affidavit of non-service was filed indicating that the Respondent could not be traced as such the court granted a motion filed and moved by the Petitioner to reach the Respondent by way of substituted service which was executed but the Respondent failed to come to court. The Petitioner was therefore ordered to file her Witness Statement after which CMC was conducted and hearing commenced. In the evidence of the Petitioner as per her Witness Statement she stated that they had their customary marriage under the Krobo traditional rites and practice and this was converted to ordinance marriage at the church of Pentecost, Mampong on 30/12/2017 and they were issued with marriage certificate which was tendered admitted and marked. The marriage was blessed with a child by name Chris OdjaoNanor who is 3 years old and attending school at vision Academy, Somanya. According to the Petitioner the Respondent has been having extra-marital affairs with other women during 3 years into the marriage despite several complaints by her. She added that the Respondent at times leaves the matrimonial home for days and returns home late at night without any information or explanation to her. She further stated that for more than 3 years the respondent had denied her sex and had refused to financially maintain the child of the marriage and neglected the provision of the needs of the household which had resulted in the Petitioner’s sole management of the burden or situation. It is the case of the Petitioner that she had reported the Respondent’s conduct to the elders of both families who have made several attempts at settlement without success. She further stated that she once gave GH₵9,000.00 to the Respondent as financial assistance upon request with a promise to pay but the respondent failed to honour the promise despite several demands. The Petitioner concluded that for the past 3 years she and the Respondent are separated and staying at different places with the maintenance and payment of the child’s school fees being solely managed by her. The legal issue for determination by the court is whether or not the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. Section 2 of the matrimonial causes Act 1971 (Act 367) provides that for the purpose of showing that a marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation the petitioner shall satisfy the court of one or more of the following facts: 2(1) (b) That the respondent has behaved in such a way that the petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the respondent. (c) That the respondent has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of at least two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition. (d) That the parties to the marriage have not lived as man and wife for a continuous period of at least two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition. (f) That the parties to the marriage have after diligent effort been unable to reconcile their differences. Evidence adduced is indicative of the fact that the Respondent has been having extra- marital affairs with other women and leaves the matrimonial home at will for days and comes home very late at night. This conduct cannot motivate the petitioner to reasonably live with the respondent. Also the respondent has deserted the petitioner for 3 years as such both parties have therefore not lived as man and wife for three 3 years and the respondent has denied the petitioner sex for this period. In addition, the parties have been unable to reconcile their differences after diligent effort. It is therefore my finding that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation. In the circumstance, I declare the ordinance marriage between Akweteh Victoria Mamleand Abraham NanorNarhduly dissolved and make the following orders: 1. The Respondent shall pay a compensation of GH₵20,000.00 to the petitioner. 2. Custody of the child Chris OdjaoNanor is granted to the Petitioner. 3. The Respondent shall pay monthly maintenance of GH₵500.00 in respect of the child, Chris OdjaoNanor. 4. The Respondent shall pay the school fees of the child as and when it is due. 5. The Respondent shall pay a refund of GH₵,9000.00 to the Petitioner. ……..………………………….. MICHAEL DEREK OCLOO DISTRICT MAGISTRATE 20TH OCTOBER, 2022