This is an appeal against the decision of the Sharia Court of Appeal, Gusau Zone of Sokoto State in which it upheld the reduced N13, 000 ‘Khul’ (from N30,000) demanded by the respondent from the appellant and directed that the appellant should go back to her husband - The respondent’s house in lieu of payment of the demanded ‘Khul’ when the appellant offered to pay N1,000 instead. The Sharia Court of Appeal did not grant divorce to the appellant as requested. The plaintiff appellant commenced the proceedings before the Chafe Area Court in Case No. CV 96/87 of 10/2/87 seeking the dissolution of her marriage with the respondent on the ground of cruelty.

The respondent denied the plaintiff/appellant’s claim and alleged that it was the plaintiff/appellant who one day gave him some money as the refund of his dowry. The respondent claimed that he refused the money and opted for reconciliation. He denied either abusing or beating her. Her then urged the court to refuse her the divorce. The plaintiff in proof of her claim of cruelty beating and abusing called as witnesses two other wives of the respondent namely Hajiya Mairo and Halima.

Her witness No. 1, Hajiya Mairo testified that when they (plaintiff and defendant) quarreled, she was at Bilbis and as such she did not know any thing about the quarrel. She denied knowing anything about abuse either. Her No. 2 witness Halima who confirmed being in the plaintiff’s room when the respondent was blaming her for refusing food to his mother said she was ordered out by the respondent hence she did not know what happened later between the parties. She only saw the plaintiff later following the respondent to his room. The plaintiff was not able to fault both witnesses under cross-examination.

The Area Court adjourned the case twice for the respondent to reconcile with the plaintiff appellant but this failed as the husband said he could not get the plaintiff. The plaintiff claimed the respondent was not interested in reconciliation. She was also adamant that she would not go back to the respondent’s home again as she does not love him anymore In the end since the two witnesses failed to support plaintiff’s claim the trial court dismissed her claim for divorce. However since the plaintiff said she did not love respondent again, in a situation similar to cross petition, the respondent/defendant agreed to give the appellant a khul divorce if she could pay him a sum of N20, 000 to enable him marry another wife and for expenses he had incurred for their marriage. The plaintiff claimed she had not a single kobo to pay the defendant but begged him to bear with her on the compensation. The respondent rejected the plea of the plaintiff and requested for the N20, 000 or order the plaintiff be sent back to his home in lieu thereof. In its judgment, the court then ordered the appellant to pay the N20, 000 or go back to the respondent within 14 days in lieu of such payment. Dissatisfied with this judgment of the Chafe Area Court, the appellant appealed to the Sharia Court of Appeal, Gusau Zone, Sokoto State.

At the Sharia Court of Appeal both parties made their submissions along the lines of their evidence at Chafe Area Court.

The appellant submitted further in addition to the allegation made in the court below and her grounds of appeal that her husband does not like her because since she left with her daughter for her father’s house 2 years ago he never sent anything to her or the daughter. That he never responded to the various opportunities offered by the lower court for reconciliation. She said she would never go back to the husband because of his failure to observe his religious obligation regularly. The respondent denied all the allegations save his refusal to avail himself of the opportunities for reconciliation. The Sharia Court of Appeal also adjourned for them to reconcile and the same result was got.

On the persuasion of the court, the appellant agreed first to pay back the N100.00 dowry to the respondent, later raised the ‘Khul’ to N300.00 and finally to N1, 000 By the same token, the respondent lowered the ‘Khul’ from N20, 000 to N15, 000 and later to N13, 000 The appellant said she was poor and could not add anything and the respondent made similar request as in lower court for an order on the appellant to go back to his home in lieu of payment of the N13, 000 ‘Khul’ Again as was the cases in the Area Court the Sharia Court of Appeal, Gusau Zone dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay N13,000 to the respondent or go back to the respondent’s house in lieu thereof.

ADissatisfied with that judgment the appellant further appealed to the court of appeal.