IN THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE

IN THE LAGOS JUDICIAL DIVISION

HOLDEN AT LAGOS
SUIT NO: LD/439WD/2013
BETWEEN

IDOWU MODUPEOLA ADEBESIN … PETITIONER

(NEE OJO)

AND

REMI BIODUN ADEBESIN ... RESPONDENT

ORDER X11 RULE 1

FORM 35
DECREE NISI OF DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE

THIS PETITION was determined on the 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015. Petitioner
Present and Respondent absent. Counsel appeared for the petitioner in Court and no
legal representation for the Respondent.

The Court was satisfied that as at the time the suit was filed the Petitioner was
domiciled in Nigeria within the meaning of the Matrimonial Causes Act and that since
the marriage, the Respondent has behaved in such a way the Petitioner cannot
reasonably be expected to live with the Respondent.

The Court was also satisfied that the Marriage contracted on the 2nd day of June, 2011
at Somolu Marriage Registry, Lagos State, Nigeria between the Petitioner, IDOWU
MODUPEOLA ADEBESIN (NEE OJO) and the Respondent, REMI BIODUN
ADEBESIN be dissolved by reason and facts that the Marriage had broken down
irretrievably.

The Court therefore pronounced a Decree Nisi of dissolving the Marriage contracted
on the 2nd day of June, 2011 at Somolu Marriage Registry, Lagos State, Nigeria
between the Petitioner and the Respondent herein.

The Court further ordered that the Decree Nisi of Dissolution of Marriage shall be
made absolute at the expiration of three (3) months from today unless sufficient
reason is shown to the contrary and that the custody of the children of the marriage to
wit; Imisioluwa Esther Adebesin (30/03/2012) and Oluwadamisi Grace Adebesin
(03/07/2014) be with the Petitioner with reasonable access granted to the Respondent
herein.

…………………….…………………
ASSISTANT CHIEF REGISTRAR
LITIGATION
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE
IN THE LAGOS JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT LAGOS
SUIT NO: LD/439WD/2013
BETWEEN

IDOWU MODUPEOLA ADEBESIN … PETITIONER

(NEE OJO)

AND

REMI BIODUN ADEBESIN ... RESPONDENT

ORDER X11 RULE 7 (2)

FORM 41
CERTIFICATE OF DECREE NISI HAVING BECOME ABSOLUTE

1. DATE OF DECREE NISI 15TH APRIL, 2015

2. DATE OF ORDER UNDER 15TH APRIL, 2015

SECTION 57

3. DATE OF DETERMINATION OR NOT APPLICABLE

DISCONTINUANCE OF APPEAL

4. DATE OF ORDER UNDER NOT APPLICABLE

SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION 42

5. DATE OF WHICH INTERVENTION NOT APPLICABLE

DETERMINED

I certify that the DECREE NISI of Dissolution of Marriage between the Petitioner,
IDOWU MODUPEOLA ADEBESIN (NEE OJO) and the Respondent, REMI
BIODUN ADEBESIN which was contracted on the 2nd day of June, 2011 at Somolu
Marriage Registry, Lagos State, Nigeria, became absolute on the 16th day of July,
2015.

DATED AT LAGOS THIS ……………. DAY OF ……………………, 2024.

…………………….…………………
ASSISTANT CHIEF REGISTRAR
LITIGATION
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF LAGOS STATE
IN THE LAGOS JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT LAGOS
TODAY TUESDAY THE 15TH DAY OF APRIL, 2015
BEFORE THE HON. JUSTICE C. A. BALOGUN - JUDGE
SUIT NO: LD/439WD/2013
BETWEEN

IDOWU MODUPEOLA ADEBESIN … PETITIONER

(NEE OJO)

AND

REMI BIODUN ADEBESIN ... RESPONDENT

JUDGMENT

By petition dated 8th day of November, 2013, the Petitioner, Idowu

Modupeola Adebesin (Nee Ojo), a Teacher and a resident of 15 Enimakure
street , Parafa, Itoikin Road, Ikorodu, Lagos State, Nigeria petitions the Court
for a Decree of Dissolution of Marriage against the Respondent; Remi Biodun
Adebesin on the ground of:
(a) That since the marriage, the Respondent has behaved in such a way that
the Petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with the
Respondent.
(b) That the parties to the marriage have lived apart for a continuous period
of two (2) years preceding the presentation of the petition, the facts
being relied upon are as stated in the petition and the orders being
sought are as stated in the petition. To the 11 paragraphs petition, the
Respondent did not file any response.
The matter proceeded to trial on the 19th day of December, 2013, the
Petitioner testified for herself and called no other witnesses, she stated her
name, address, a Teacher, the Respondent is her husband and she got
married to him on the 2nd day of June, 2011 at Somolu Marriage Registry,
Lagos State, Nigeria, and tendered in evidence the Certified True Copy of the
Marriage Certificate which was marked in evidence as Exhibit DTA1.

It is the evidence that the marriage was well initiated, when they got
married, they lived together at 15 Enimakure street , Parafa, Itoikin Road,
Ikorodu, Lagos State, Nigeria. It is her evidence that cohabitation ceased,
he moved out of their matrimonial home. She wants the Court to dissolve
the marriage and the Compulsory Conference held be added to the
Judgment of this Honourable Court. She stated that there was no
connivance, no condonation.

Cohabitation ceased over a period of time, all efforts to reconcile them

proved abortive, they were not willing to live together any more or be in the
marriage any longer. The Respondent/Cross Petitioner did not call evidence.
The matter proceeded to address stage. The Petitioner’s Final Written
Address was filed on the 15th day of April, 2021.

Learned counsel gave an introduction, background facts and raised one

issue for determination as follows:
Whether the marriage between the Petitioner/Cross Respondent and the
Respondent/Cross Petitioner has broken down irretrievable.

He referred to Section 15 (1) of the Matrimonial Causes Act and Section 15

(2). The case of Ajidahun v. Ajidahun (2000) 4 NWLR (Pt 654) and
submitted that from the evidence of the Petitioner, the
Respondent/Cross Petitioner behaved in such a way that the Petitioner
cannot reasonably be expected to bear same and continue to live with
the Respondent/Cross Petitioner that he was adequately satisfied.
Section 15 (20) (c) (d) and (f) of the Matrimonial Causes Act.

She submitted further that the Petitioner has been able to prove her
evidence before the Court that the Respondent packed out of the
matrimonial home and has not returned, the parties have lived apart for
over a period of two (2) years preceding the presentation of the petition.
The Respondent does not object to the granting of the relief, her evidence
has not been challenged or contradicted. She urged the Court to find that
the Petitioner has discharged on us, proof of all the facts stated in her
evidence. The Court is to grant the Petitioner’s prayer.

The Petitioner’s final Written Address was filed on the 16th of May, 2014.
Learned Counsel gave an introduction, and raised one issue for determination
as follows: “Whether this Honourable Court can grant the prayer for
dissolution of marriage as sought by both parties.” And in arguing the issue
raised, she referred to the evidence by the Petitioner at the trial and
submitted that the Petitioner’s main aim is to be relieved of the matrimonial
duties which she had earlier subscribed. She urged the Court to dissolve the
marriage as the parties are no longer in amity and the likelihood of a
peaceful matrimonial relationship is dead.
I have carefully considered the evidence of the Petitioner in this suit, the
documents tendered in evidence, and the submission of the learned counsel
after a careful consideration of the above. I have this to say:

The sole issue for determination is whether from the facts and
circumstances of the case the marriage should be dissolved.

The Respondent failed to show up at the trial of this suit, he is deemed to

have abandoned his pleadings.

See the case of:

VASSLEV V. PAAS INDUSTRY LTD (2000) 12 NWLR (PT 681), 347 AT 355,
PARAS E-F.
The submission of learned counsel to the Respondent/Cross Petitioner is
hereby discontinued. Subsection (F) of the Matrimonial Causes Act. and she
gave evidence to the fact that the Respondent deserted the matrimonial
home; he moved to his own house, he said he was not safe in the
matrimonial home, they were practically living as strangers, he stopped being
responsible in the house, comes late, they were no longer doing things
together as husband and wife. She stated that they are no longer willing to
live together or to be in the marriage. Section 15 (1) the Matrimonial Causes
Act, Cap 220 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1990 specifically states that
there is only one ground for the dissolution of all marriages i.e. it has broken
down irretrievably and that since the marriage, the Respondent has behaved
in such a way that the Petitioner cannot reasonably be expected to live with
the Respondent and Section 15 (2) (a)-(h) lists out the facts to be relied
upon.

The Petitioner has given evidence of the behavior of the Respondent which
she finds intolerable, how he changed a n d not taking responsibility of the
matrimonial home. It is therefore my view that he has satisfied (2) (c) of the
Act.

See also
EKANEM V. EKANEM & ANR (2002) LPELR/CA/C/157/2000
The petitioner also gave evidence to the fact that the Respondent/Cross
Petitioner moved out of the matrimonial home with the intension to
permanently be separated from her, without her consent.
See also:
ANIORE V. ANIORE (2008) CA/C/26/2008
She has also satisfied Section 15 (2) (D) of the Act. This petition was filed on
the 8th day of November, 2013, the Respondent /Cross Petitioner deserted his
matrimonial home over a period of two (2) years. This satisfies the provisions
of Section 15 (2) (F), which is a no-fault section.

The marriage has broken down irretrievably, the Petitioner is entitled to a

Decree of Dissolution of the marriage, and the Respondent did not prove the
allegation in his Answer & Cross Petition.

I hereby pronounce a Decree Nisi of dissolution of the marriage celebrated

on the 2nd day of June, 2011 at Somolu Marriage Registry, Lagos State,
Nigeria between the Petitioner - Idowu Modupeola Adebesin (Nee Ojo) and
the Respondent - Remi Biodun Adebesin. The Decree shall become absolute
at the expiration of 3 months from today unless sufficient cause is shown to
the contrary and that the custody (Section 57) of the children of the
marriage to wit Imisioluwa Esther Adebesin (30/03/2012) and
Oluwadamisi Grace Adebesin (03/07/2014) be with the Petitioner
with reasonable access granted to the Respondent herein.

Dated this 15th day of April, 2015.

HON. JUSTICE C. A. BALOGUN

JUDGE
th
15 APRIL, 2015