Delivery the judgment in Makurdi, Magistrate Rose Iyorshe, ordered that Audu would pay the amount in three instalments from June to August.
NAN reports that Audu had dragged Philip, before the Upper Area Court alleging that the respondent shortly after their marriage in 2015, started conducting himself in a manner incompatible to the lifestyle of the petitioner.
Audu told that the court that they got married in 2015 under the Tiv native laws and customs and the marriage was yet to have children.
Iyorshe held that Audu and Philip have agreed that the marriage has broken down irretrievably and there was no love between them.
Both parties have also agreed that the petitioner, acquired the land where the disputed estate was built even before they got married.
The petitioner, however, has failed to show enough evidence that she has the financial capacity to built the estate under dispute.
Without over flogging this issue, it is in evidence that the petitioner as a civil servant, earns between N40,000 to N60,000 and in addition, she sells clothing and shoes.
However, when considered alongside developing a five-block structure within two years, how possible is this, except if of course, she has other ways of earning money which is not stated in this case.
In the light of the above, it cannot be denied that the respondent is a major contributor to the development of the block of flats on the land which belongs to the petitioner.
Consequently, I enter judgment in this case as follows: the marriage between Selumum Audu and Philip, is hereby dissolved and they cease to be husband and wife.
The petitioner is to pay the respondent N10 million as part of his contribution towards building the blocks of flat on her land during the subsistence of their relationship and eventual marriage. the court held
NAN reports that Audu told the court during the hearing that she married Audu in 2015 but in 2017 the respondent became physically violent.
She urged that court dissolve the customary marriage contracted in 2015 on the ground of incompatibility.
The petitioner also prayed the court to order the respondent to vacate the matrimonial home acquired and developed by the petitioner.
However, the respondent, who conceded to the divorce told the court that he built the five blocks estate on the land of the petitioner and called witnesses and documentation to support his claims.
Author: Idowu Bankole