GERTRUDE AGBEWOLE v. CHRISTOPHER AGBODOGBEY

JUDGMENT

KUSI-APPIAH, J.A. This is an appeal against the judgment of the Circuit Court, Accra, dated 14th day of February 2006, in favour of the Petitioner/Respondent against the Respondent/ Appellant. I will refer to the parties in the manner they appeared at the court below.

By her petition filed on 7th day of November 2005, the petitioner prayed that:

“a The marriage between the Petitioner and the Respondent be dissolved.

b The matrimonial home being House No. MD934, Madina, be conveyed to the Petitioner as the sole owner.

c The container Respondent used Petitioner’s money to make be given to the Petitioner.

d The Respondent be ordered to pay the Petitioner a lump sum.”

The case of the petitioner as gathered from her pleadings and especially evidence at the trial is that, the parties married under custom on 10th January, 1971 and had six children all of whom are now adults. The petitioner pleaded in the main her immense contribution in purchasing the matrimonial house in 1971 for Gh¢60.00. She averred that she contributed Gh¢40.00 while the respondent contributed Gh¢20.00, that she built the two self-contained rooms as well as three single rooms to the house which originally comprised four chamber and hall rooms.

The petitioner testified that the marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation as a result of unreasonable behaviour on the part of the respondent which includes his refusal to consummate the marriage (that is, have sexual intercourse with her) since 1982, cruelty to her following persistent and regular assault by the respondent which has affected her eyes, collapse of her business by misusing her capital, selling her urvan bus as well as a parcel of her land at Ashalley Botwe in Accra.

Worse still, the petitioner continued that the respondent has rented out all the rooms in the matrimonial house using the proceeds for his own purposes. That when she complained about respondent’s conduct in using the monies accruing from the renting of the property, the respondent took her to International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA for short) that she be ejected from matrimonial home. But after hearing evidence from the parties, FIDA dismissed the respondent’s case and declared the subject property as jointly owned by the parties.

The respondent resisted the petitioner’s claim. The key points in the respondent’s answer are that he bought the matrimonial house in January 1970 before he married the petitioner in 1971, that he solely funded the