ADARAMAJA V. ADARAMAJA

• Pages: 170-175

170



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

f1962] N.S.C.C.

of interpretation used by the 2nd plaintiff witness. The Illiterates Protection Act was

designed to protect illiterates from being taken advantage of by being made to

sign or acknowledge a writing or document which does not bear out their real in-

tention. In the case on appeal before us the trial Judge has found as a fact, and

it has not been challenged, that this document truly represents the intention of the



5

appellant; that it was interpreted to him; that he understood it and agreed to it be-

fore appending his signature.

As for the contention that the typist was the writer of the guarantee and not the

Manager of the respondent company, there is no substance in this point and I need

say no more than that the fact that the typist who typed the guarantee was working



10

in the office of the respondent company of which P.W.1. was the Manager,

coupled with the fact that on the evidence of P.W. 1 the latter made manuscript in-

sertions on the document, brings him within the definition of a "writer as contained

in s.7 of the Act.

For the reasors given by me in this judgment I would dismiss this appeal with



15

costs assessed at 20 guineas.

Ademola, C.F.J.

I concur.

Unsworth, F.J.

I concur.

Appeal dismissed.

ADARAMAJA V. ADARAMAJA

AKINOLA ADARAMAJA



APPELLANT

V

CATHERINE CARMELITA ADARAMAJA



RESPONDENT

SUIT NO. FSC 412/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

ADEMOLA,



C.J.F.

UNSWORTH,



F.J.

TAYLOR,



F.J.

28th April, 1962.

Matrimonial Causes - Husband and wife - Divorce - Cruelty - Discretion Statement

- High Court - discretion of court - Not exercisable where court has found

the grounds of petition not proved.

Practice and Procedure - failure to prove grounds of petition - Matrimonial Causes

Act, 1950 (England) (14 Geo 6c 25) s.4(2).

ISSUES:

1.

Whether acts which cause mental stress are sufficient to prove cruelty in a



45

petition for dissolution of a marriage.

2.

Whether a Court can exercise discretion in favour of a petitioner in a matrimonial

cause where grounds of the said petition are not proved.

FACTS:

The appellant brought a petition seeking the dissolution of his marriage to the



50

Respondent on grounds of cruelty. He gave instances such as her beating him in

public and causing him embarrassment in many ways. He also asked the trial court

to exercise its discretion in favour of his alleged adultery with a named woman.

20

25

30

35

40