HCL v RMO (Divorce Cause E1313 of 2021) [2023] KEMC 205 (KLR) (7 August 2023) (Judgment)
Neutral citation:
[2023] KEMC 205 (KLR)
Republic of Kenya
Divorce Cause E1313 of 2021
JP Aduke, SRM
August 7, 2023
Between
HCL
Petitioner
and
RMO
Respondent
Judgment
1.The Petitioner filed the petition dated 1st December 2021 seeking a divorce on the grounds of cruelty, desertion and irretrievable breakdown of the marriage. Return of service on record shows that the respondent was served with the petition and annexures thereto. The respondent entered appearance and filed an answer to the petition. These proceedings proceeded defended.
2.The brief facts of the case are as contained in the petition and answer to petition on record. In summary, HCL and RMO solemnized their marriage in Kenya on 19th January 2010 at the Office of the Attorney General. Both the petitioner and the respondent are domiciled in Kenya. They have three issues together from the union. The parties have no intentions of salvaging this marriage. The particulars of the grounds for divorce are outlined in the petition as follows:1.Cruelty;2.Desertion;3.Irreconcilable differences /Irretrievable breakdown of the marriage;
3.At the hearing thereof, the petitioner was absent and Petitioner Counsel closed the case without calling any witnesses. The respondent testified and prayed for an order of divorce.
4.The issue for determination before this court is whether or not the marriage between the parties merits an order of divorce under The Marriage Act, 2014 (hereafter, the Act).
5.The applicable law is s.66 of the Act (dissolution of Civil Marriages) which provides that the court may grant separation or divorce on the following grounds:1.adultery by the other spouse;2.cruelty by the other spouse;3.exceptional depravity by the other spouse;4.desertion by the other spouse for at least 3 years;5.the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage.
6.I have considered the particulars of the grounds outlined in the petition and how those have contributed to the irretrievable breakdown of the marriage as contemplated under s.66 of the Act. I have also noted the length of physical separation of the couple herein, the high levels of antagonism between the parties and relied on the reasoning of the court in JSM vs ENB[2015]. With respect to intention to salvage the union, I have noted the unequivocal terms of the Petition and Answer to Petition on lack of such intention. The reasoning of the court in ROK v MJB[2017]eKLR and TPH v NVS [2017] eKLR cannot be emphasized enough-“marriage is a voluntary union……this court cannot by any means order or compel the parties to remain married when the petitioner has categorically stated that she wants the same dissolved…” Seeing as this Court cannot force two adults to live together when there is no more love between them, I allow the petition dated 01st December 2021 on the following terms:1.the marriage between the two be and is hereby dissolved.2.Decree nisi do issue to be made absolute in 30 days.3.To avoid duplicity of orders, either party is at liberty to move the Children Court Nairobi for appropriate reliefs on custody and injunctions.4.This being a family matter, each party to bear their own costs.
ADUKE JEAL PRAXADES ATIENOSENIOR RESIDENT MAGISTRATEJUDGEMENT SIGNED AT NAIROBI THIS 07TH AUGUST 2023 IN THE ABSENCE /PRESENCE OF THE PARTIES AT 12.30PM.In the presence of :1. Court Assistant: Benjamin Kombe2. Counsel for the Petitioner-3. Counsel for the Respondent: