The respondent made a reply to the petition and apart from general denials, he admitted that he traditionally married the petitioner. That he prefers the Christian faith and admits that the certificate of civil marriage was obtained though he stated that they only acquired it for purposes of securing a job as the job required someone married. By that statement, the respondent admits that the Customary Registration Marriages’ Decree did not constitute a marriage. It’s only at the acquisition of the certificate of marriage through the civil marriage that he was married in a monogamous marriage. He alleged that the marriage certificate was null and void, but he never took any steps in the courts of law to declare that marriage null and void and so he had no capacity to state what he stated and it could not be sustained. In paragraph 10 of his reply, he conceded to his not fulfilling his responsibilities and he added that the children were grownups (adults) capable of looking after themselves (paragraph 10 thereof). He also stated that he lost his job and that’s why he could not pay their schools and he asked the children to supplement by paying fees. I find this contradictory after saying that the children were adults and capable of looking after themselves. He stated in paragraph 14 that the petitioner accepted that the 3rd wife be brought home at Christmas on 25th December 2005 and he denies it being unbearable and called it a misrepresentation. He conceded having got another woman in the form of 3rd wife and that he did it with the knowledge of the petitioner. He denied having been cruel to the petitioner and being harsh to her and that he has been giving a helping hand to her for her to have comfortable life. This was a case which depended on whether there was a valid marriage between the petitioner and the respondent. There is overwhelming evidence on record to prove that there was a valid binding marriage between the parties. There was the customary marriage which was concretised by the acquisition of the Civil Marriage Certificate in 1997. I find the denial of the respondent that the Civil Marriage was not conducted untainable. The certificate is valid and it’s not contested in substance or otherwise unless if it’s declared null and void in the Courts of Law. S.14 of the Divorce Act Cap 249 provides as follows:‘A husband or wife may apply by petition to the court of law for judicial or separation on the grounds of cruelty, adultery or desertion without reasonable excuse for two years or upwards and the court on being satisfied that the allegations of the petition are true and that there is no legal ground why the application should not be granted, may decree judicial separation accordingly.