The appellant is the husband of the respondent. The marriage between them, which was under the Marriage Act, was solemnized on the 19th October, 1974. There were six children of the marriage at the time that the appellant filed a petition for the dissolution of the marriage on the 24th January, 1986. According to the petition, the ground on which it was based was:-

Prior to the aforesaid marriage, the appellant and the respondent who are Ibos went through a ceremony of marriage according to Ibo native law and custom.

The respondent filed an answer to the Petition in which she denied all the allegations in the petition. She urged the court not to grant the petition.

The evidence led by the petitioner was that there were frequent quarrels between him and the respondent. The respondents was also having misunderstanding with the relations of the petitioner.

The appellant alleged that the respondent committed adultery with two separate persons at certain times. The respondent was cruel to the appellant and used to pester the appellant about the disability or deformity of the appellant the presence of the children. He also alleged that the respondent used to incite the children against him and he led evidence that the respondent used to place things like stool and other objects on his way so that he might fall down as he could not see well in the night.

The appellant sustained injury as a result of an incident and one of his hands was deformed. The respondent was fond of making "juju", native medicine. He no longer loved the respondent.

The respondent led evidence in order to show that all the allegations against her were not true. She loved the appellant otherwise she would not have continued to his wife from 1974 when they got married up to1986 when the appellant presented a petition for divorce and during which period she had six children for the appellant. According to the respondent, she still loved the appellant and did not want a divorce. She was a Christian and she did not commit adultery with anybody nor did she engage in making any native medicine. She pointed out that the problem which the couple had was that the appellant was being influenced to a great extent by his relations in whose presence the appellant was always hostile to the respondent. Otherwise, the relationship between the appellant and the respondent was perfectly normal.

The learned trial judge, after giving consideration to the evidence led by both parties and to the submissions of their learned counsel, held that the petition was defective in certain respects and that defect are fatal to the appellant's case. Alternatively, he dealt with the petition on the merit and came to the conclusion that cruelty which appeared to be the only aspect of the case seriously canvassed during the proceeding was not sufficiently proved. He, therefore, dismissed the petition.

Dissatisfied with the judgement of the learned trial judge, the appellant has appealed to this court.