JUDGMENT OF ABOAGYE J.
The petitioner herein seeks dissolution of his marriage to the respondent on the ground that the said marriage has broken down beyond reconciliation owing to cruel conduct and adultery on the part of the respondent. The petitioner also claims damages against the co-respondent herein for committing adultery with his wife thereby causing the breakdown of his marriage.
Copies of the petition were served on the respondent and the co-respondent but they did not even enter appearance. In his petition the petitioner stated that the co-respondent had committed adultery with the respondent quite frequently and that since 30 September 1971, the two have been living together in the co-respondent's flat at Kwabenya. It was further stated in the petition that the respondent had refused to move with the petitioner from Kwabenya where they previously had their matrimonial home to Tesano where the petitioner had been given new accommodation.
The petitioner gave evidence which clearly showed that on a number of occasions the co-respondent had gone out with the respondent and the latter had returned home very late in the night or in the early hours of the following day. He had seen the respondent and the co-respondent together at night in compromising situations and had remonstrated with the respondent against her association with the co-respondent but his remonstrations had always been met with abuses and insults from the respondent. On 6 July 1971, at about 4 o'clock in the morning, the petitioner could not find the respondent in her bed and when he went out he saw through a window of the co-respondent's bedroom that the co-respondent was lying on his bed and the respondent was sitting on the bed dressing. The only inference to be drawn from that situation is that the co-respondent had committed adultery with the respondent.
The petitioner's only witness, Dr. Margaret Earle of the University of Ghana, Legon, gave evidence that some time towards the end of 1970 the respondent told her that she had been having an affair with the co-respondent. She also told the court that some time in or about August [p.436] 1971, she went to the petitioner and respondent in their flat after she had noticed that the relationship between them had got strained and she was then told by the respondent and petitioner that there was no hope of their getting reconciled.
The evidence of the petitioner and his witness was unchallenged and I am satisfied therefrom that t
