Woman refuses to be divorced

A Bulawayo woman left the High Court stunned when she declared that she did not want her husband, whom she has been married to for just 16 months, to divorce her.
Mrs Sicelo Madikana nee Nkomo, whose age was not given in court papers, stunned the court when she declared to senior Bulawayo High Court judge Justice Nicholas Ndou that she did not want her husband, Mr Nkululeko Masilo Madikana to divorce her because he had not fulfilled his verbal promise.
Asked what her defence was, Mrs Madikana, who admitted that the marriage had irretrievably broken down, said her husband had promised to take her back to her people before filing for a divorce.
It was her evidence after taking to the stand that she was surprised to be served with divorce summons.
Justice Ndou told Mrs Madikana that there was no legal basis in what she was saying and advised her to put her house in order.
The matter, in which Mr Madikana is represented by Mr Godfrey Nyoni, of Moyo and Nyoni Legal Practitioners, was by consent postponed to 13 September with the judge warning Mrs Madikana that the divorce would be granted even if she does not file any papers.
According to Mr Madikana's affidavit, the couple married under Chapter 5:11 of the Marriages Act on 30 April last year.
He states that there are no children in the marriage and states that the marriage has irretrievably broken down.
Mr Madikana says the parties have lost love and affection for each other and his wife has abused him both physically and mentally.
He said she had also caused embarrassment to him by telling his relatives that he is impotent and also made false allegations to the police that he was engaged in scandals at his workplace.
Mr Madikana said his wife also shouts at him and was always threatening him with undisclosed lawsuits. He said she had also caused him embarrassment by telling his church members that he was having an extra-marital affair and as a result he had since been stopped from attending any church services.
Mr Madikana said his wife was abusive to his children and she deserted their matrimonial home in January this year.
"During the subsistence of the marriage we bought some kitchen utensils and a double bed which she took when she left. It will thus be equitable if each party retains the property in its possession and custody," wrote Mr Madikana.He said each party should bear the costs of the divorce suit.