Court grants man divorce over wife’s refusal to meet sexual demand

An Igando Customary Court on Tuesday dissolved the union between Mr Taofeek Muritala and Mrs Jelilat Muritala on grounds of frequent fighting and lack of love.

The petitioner, Mr Muritala, a resident of No.11, Muritala Taofeek St., White Sand area of Isheri in Lagos State, had approached the court on Dec. 2, 2021 seeking the dissolution of his 10-year-old marriage to his wife.

He alleged that his wife was very troublesome, being too heady and not taking care of their children.

“Our problem started in 2002 when I was a motorcycle operator and my wife just delivered a baby. Then, I used to give her N100 as daily allowance, but for some time I could not meet up because I had to also deliver money to the owner of the motorcycle I was riding.

”One day, she calculated all the money I owed her which she said amounted to N900. On that day, she held on to my shirt, fought me and insisted that I must give her the money or else that I would not leave the house.

“It was the neighbours that had to intervene and in the process, she tore my clothes.

“She would always leave the house and only to return later whenever she felt like. Also, she dislikes my mother, alleging that my mother used to complain that the pieces of meat she put in the pot of soup were always too big among other flimsy reasons.

“Each time my mother was visiting us, my wife would fight her. Because of the incessant quarrels between them, I had to advise my mother not to visit again.

“Also, I’m the one who is always taking our children to school. She does not have the time to take care of them; she does only what pleases her, she’s such a hooligan.

“Anytime there was a fight between us, she would not hesitate to draw out a knife or break bottles,” he said.

The petitioner also told the court that his wife would not take to corrections and was fond of disrespecting his family, hence, there is no more love between them. He then urged the court to grant him a divorce from his wife.

The respondent, Mrs Jelilat Muritala, a caterer and a resident of the same address as her husband, countered all that her husband said, but told the court that they used to quarrel because of sex.

“Our fight is simply because of sex, he demands sex every day and I’m tired of it. Also, it is not true that I don’t take care of the children, I always do. He only takes them to school since he operates a motorcycle.

“I do not also fight my mother-in-law, but there is nothing I do that pleases her. She complains about everything I do, but I have a cordial relationship with other members of my husband’s family.

“He said that I used a charm on him; that is also a lie. When he was very sick, I took him to a church where he was given blessed water which cured his illness, so how does that translate to charm?

“Although, he claimed that it was not the water that healed him that it was the charcoal he took,” she said.

The respondent told the court that truly there was no more love between them since her husband had married a second wife.

She added that she had moved on with her life.

The President of the court, Mr Koledoye Adeniyi, in his judgment said that after listening to both sides, the respondent was not submissive enough and to make matters worse, they dragged their children into their rift.

He said that it was wrong for the wife to have denied her husband sex even though he was demanding it daily, adding that it was part of what contributed to the failure of the marriage.

According to the president, the woman’s act of denying her husband sex was what pushed him into marrying another woman to satisfy his sexual urge.

“In this view, the marriage has broken down irretrievably and therefore the dissolution of their marriage succeeds,” he said.

He ordered the petitioner to give the respondent the sum of N200,000 as severance allowance and to also pay the sum of N150,000 to assist the respondent to secure an accommodation where should relocate to.

He also ordered the petitioner to take good care of the younger children in his care and be responsible for the education of the grown up children.

He said that any violation of the judgment would be regarded as contempt of the court and would attract six months’ imprisonment without an option of fine. (NAN)