Cookie Policy
JUDGMENT
APPAU, JSC
My Lords, the appeal before us is the culmination of what, prima facie, appeared to be a simple matrimonial cause ignited by the woman in the marriage (as petitioner) against her husband (the respondent), for the dissolution of their ordinance marriage. The second and last relief the petitioner asked for, apart from the dissolution, was an order for the custody or maintenance (as she put it), of the two issues in the marriage. This second or last relief of the petitioner, which respondent also prayed for in respect of the younger child in his cross-petition, became redundant in the course of the trial, when all the two issues in the marriage attained adulthood. Petitioner did not seek any relief on property settlement, as her case was that she never acquired any property jointly with the respondent during the subsistence of the marriage, which needed to be shared. The only thing she said she had in common with respondent was a limited liability company called NAYAK Cā¦