Lu­veve MP in di­vorce court

Chronicle (Zimbabwe) - - Analysis/national News - Mashudu Net­sianda

LU­VEVE Mem­ber of Par­lia­ment Ntan­doyenkosi Mlilo (Zanu-PF) is seek­ing the dis­so­lu­tion of his mar­riage to his wife of 11 years for al­legedly deny­ing him con­ju­gal rights for more than 12 months.

The leg­is­la­tor and his wife, Miriam Mlilo (nee Ner­wande) wed­ded on April 29, 2005 un­der Chap­ter 5:11 of the Mar­riages Act.

The cou­ple has been on sep­a­ra­tion since 2013.

The MP wants to be granted cus­tody of their three chil­dren aged be­tween five and 16 years and said his wife can get all the mov­able house­hold prop­erty.

Mlilo, through his lawyers Le­gal Re­sources Foun­da­tion, yes­ter­day filed an ap­pli­ca­tion for a de­cree of di­vorce at the Bu­l­awayo High Court cit­ing ir­rec­on­cil­able dif­fer­ences with his wife.

In pa­pers be­fore the court, the MP said his mar­riage had ir­re­triev­ably bro­ken down such that there were no prospects of restor­ing it.

“I legally mar­ried the de­fen­dant (Miriam) in terms of the Mar­riages Act (5:11) in Bu­l­awayo on April 29, 2005 and the mar­riage still sub­sists.

‘‘How­ever, the mar­riage re­la­tion­ship be­tween the par­ties has ir­re­triev­ably bro­ken down to such an ex­tent that there are no rea­son­able prospects of restora­tion,” said Mlilo.

He said they have not shared con­ju­gal rights for the past 12 months.

“The par­ties have not shared con­ju­gal rights for a pe­riod in ex­cess of 12 months and as a re­sult I have lost love and af­fec­tion for the de­fen­dant and do not wish to re­main mar­ried to her,” he stated in his sum­mons.

“It would be in the best in­ter­ests of the mi­nor chil­dren if the court or­ders that I be granted their cus­tody with the de­fen­dant be­ing granted the right to ac­cess for only two weeks dur­ing ev­ery school hol­i­day.”

Mlilo said he did not re­quire his wife to con­trib­ute in main­te­nance fees to­wards the up­keep and wel­fare of the chil­dren.

Dur­ing the sub­sis­tence of the mar­riage, the cou­ple ac­quired house­hold prop­erty.

“The house­hold prop­erty is in pos­ses­sion of the de­fen­dant.

‘‘It would be just and eq­ui­table that upon this hon­ourable court grant­ing de­cree of di­vorce, all the mov­able house­hold prop­erty should be ex­clu­sively be awarded to the de­fen­dant,” said Mlilo. —@mash­nets.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Zimbabwe

© PressReader. All rights reserved.