High court in Malindi upheld a ruling where a woman has to pay back KSh 150,000 dowry.
A High Court in Malindi upheld a ruling by the Chief Khadhi compelling a woman to pay back KSh 150,000 which was paid as her dowry.
In his ruling, High Court Justice Reuben Nyakundi said the chief khadhi acted appropriately by delivering the judgment as it was.
Judgment is clear.
He further said the consent judgment is clear on its terms that the ex-parte applicant is in default to pay the dowry as set out and agreed with the interested party.
The judge said:
I have examined the proceedings and the jurisdiction exercised by the learned Kadhi to determine questions affecting the ex-parte applicant and the interested party said the Judge. I find no mistake of law made by the Kadhi and as at the time, the important consideration underlying the decision was the consent of both parties to the claim.
The judge in his findings ruled that a consent judgment recorded and adopted by the respondent was valid and binding on the parties on its terms.
The applicant identified as ZYJ was on April 30, 2019, directed by the Chief Khadhi to pay the interested party KSh 150,000 in three instalments of KSh 50,000 with effect from May 2019.
The ex-parte applicant ZYJ was married to the interested party MKW who professes Islamic faith and later dissolved the marriage before the same Khadhi who had officiated the marriage.
On the same day, the respondent who exercises the judicial function at Mariakani Kadhis Court nullified the ex-parte applicant marriage.
The applicant had moved to the High Court to challenge the decision made by the chief khadi to pay KSh 150,000 after the nullification of their marriage.
The chief magistrate had been mentioned in the matter as the respondent after the woman argued that she had been coerced into ending her marriage.
High Court Justice Reuben Nyakundi said the chief khadhi acted appropriately by delivering the judgment as it was.
UGC However, the judge said the khadhi had a duty to judicially determine an important matter on divorce which had more impact on both parties than to a marriage union.
He also noted the khadhi who had placed the parties in a witness stand to give evidence on oath was on duty to reach a decision.
It must be made clear that the court exist to administer justice through the various procedures provided in the law.
He also explained that the chief khadhi facilitated the parties to adopt the consent to meet the ends of justice in the matter.
Justice Nyakundi said:
This court finds it difficult to disregard the consent Judgment and have it nullified without a proper factual or legal basis.
The woman further argued that she had not been a chance to defend herself.