Surtee v Surtee (Civil Cause 252 of 1986) [1987] MWHC 45 (2 October 1987)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MALAWI PRINCIPAL REGISTRY CIVIL CAUSE NO. 252 OF 1986 BETWEEN: CECILIA SURTEE canec ee eeeraccceenceceuccevcsees PETITIONER - and - ALI HASSAN SURTEE ........-. cbc eee eceewecceeee RESPONDNENT Coram: MAKUTA, Chjef Justice Fachi, Counsel Yor the Petitioner Respondent, absent, ureepresented Chigaru, Official Interpreter Manda, Court Reporter JUDGMENT ; The petitioner, Cecilia Surtee, prays for dissolution of her marriage with the reenandent, ALi Hassan Gurtee, on the gTpaunde af dosertign- The petition is undefended. The Notice of Hearing wae sent to his address on 25th August, 1987. He should, therefore, be aware of today's proceedings. On 27th May, 1978, the petitioner way lawfully married to the respondent at the Registrar General's Office in Blantyre. After the marriage ttre couple lived and cohabited at Ndirande and Nyambadwe in the City of Blantyre. There are two igsues of the marriage now living namely, Sheleen, born on 8th October, 1973 and Zarif, born on 26th May, 1975. It will be observed that the children were born before the marriage was formally registered. Both the petitioner and the respondent are Malawians domiciled in Malawi. This Court, therefore, has jurisdiction to hear this case. The petitioner told the Court that in March, 1983, the respondent left the petitioner for Lilongwe. When leaving he said that he had found another job in Lilongwe and that he would arrange for her to join him. This has not happened. He did not make any arrangement for the children. Since he left he has not sent money or anything for the maintenance of the family. He has not bothered, even once, to see the petitioner and the children. He has not even written her. Any attempt to contact him has been of no avail. At the moment the respondent is not at Lilongwe. The respondent's friends have told the petitioner that the petitioner is in Botswana. But she does not know when he left for Botswana. = Dx The petitioner ig at the moment working as a Secretary at Leyland Motors at Kanengo in Lilongwe. She joined the Company in September, 1986. It would appear at the time ehe moved to Lilongwe the respondent had already left the country. The children are staying with her and they go to school at Lilongwe. I would like to point out that the petitioner gave her evidence in a calm and dispassionate manner. I accept her evidence. I am, therefore, satisfied that the factum of separation has been proved. I am further satisfied that it has been proved that the respondent had the animus deserendi. He has been away since March, 1983, and the petitioner has not heard from him ever since. I am satisfied that there is no collusion in the presentation of this petition. I, therefore, find the respondent the guilty party. The petitioner has, in my judgment, proved the charge of desertion. I find no bar to granting a decree in this case. Accordingly I pronounce a decree nisi that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent be dissolved. The petitioner is to have custody of the children and the respondent will pay the costs of the proceedings. PRONOUNCED in open Court this 2nd day of October, 1987, at Blantyre. Mh alAv E’L. Makuta CHIEF JUSTICE