The marriage between media personality, Omotoke Makinwa and her estranged husband, Maje Ayida which hit the rocks two years ago have finally been dissolved by an Igbosere High Court in Lagos on Thursday, October 5th.
Toke had on March 9, 2016, asked the court to dissolve the marriage on the grounds that the husband committed adultery.
Justice Morenike Obadina, while delivering judgment held that Ayida filed an answer to the petition but did not give oral evidence in support of it.
She said the position of the law was settled as pleadings did not amount to evidence.
“Pleadings on which no evidence was led are deemed abandoned. Therefore, Ayida’s evidence is deemed abandoned.
“The effect being that the petitioner’s evidence is unchallenged and uncontroverted,’’ she ruled
The judge said the issue of cruelty which the petitioner (Makinwa) relied on was established because of the “mental and emotional stress” she was subjected to by her husband.
He said Makinwa had sufficiently proven that the husband committed adultery and continued to flaunt his adulterous relationships even to her face.
“I hold that the marriage has broken down on grounds of intolerable behaviour.
“I hereby pronounce a `Decree Nisi’ dissolving the marriage between Makinwa and Ayida which was administered at the Federal Marriage Registry, Ikoyi, Lagos, on Jan. 15, 2014.
“The order Nisi shall become absolute three months from today unless within that period sufficient cause is shown why it should not be made absolute,” Obadina said.
Makinwa had told the court that her husband committed adultery with his mistress, Anita Solomon, adding that the relationship produced a child.
She said since their marriage was contracted, the husband had “behaved in a way she could not reasonably be expected to continue to bear”.
She also said the husband was cruel towards her, adding that their differences became irreconcilable.
During the trial, the petitioner (Makinwa ) testified in court and tendered some documents including their marriage certificate which were admitted in evidence.
In her testimony, she said that after their marriage was contracted in 2014, cohabitation with her husband ceased on Nov. 8, 2015, without any child from the marriage.
She also told the court of an instance where her husband threatened separation and even drafted a separation agreement because she discovered that he bought a ticket for his mistress to travel to London.
The first respondent (Ayida) who replied to the petition when served, however, instructed his counsel, Mr T. O. Lawal, not to continue with the defence.
Ayida through his counsel, therefore, foreclosed all evidence.
The mistress (Solomon), who is the second respondent, refused to join issues with the petitioner.
