Online Reporter
Lovemore Kadzura
Weekender Reporter
A MAKONI family is embroiled in a bitter dispute with their son-in-law, whom they accuse of exploiting their financial support without paying a cent towards his wife’s bride price, before abandoning her for another woman—a classic case of biting the hand that feeds him.
This emerged during a hearing at Chief Makoni’s community court, where Sheba and Charles Sanyangore hauled their son-in-law, Blessing Dzingai, demanding repayment of a US$1 380 debt.
Dzingai has been cohabiting with their daughter, Beulah, since 2015, and the couple has two children.
Sheba told the court that she and her husband had been covering Dzingai’s expenses, including rentals, school fees, medical bills, and even police fines, claiming he was frequently arrested due to the nature of his hustling, which she did not disclose.
“Dzingai is my son-in-law, although he never paid the bride price for my daughter. He took Beulah in 2015, and they have been staying together since. Whenever they faced challenges, he would send Beulah to borrow money from me. As a mother aware of their struggles, I would assist. Eventually, I told Beulah that Blessing should make the requests himself,” Sheba said.
She added: “Indeed, he began asking for money for medication, rentals, and police fines. The debt kept mounting. I repeatedly asked him to pay back, but he only made empty promises. In September 2015, he borrowed US$150 for rent. I have all the messages showing his requests. Later that year, Beulah informed us that he had abandoned her and their two children, leaving them with nothing in the house. He never repaid me, and I had no choice but to seek recourse from this court.”
Sheba also petitioned the court to compel Dzingai to pay the bride price for her daughter, demanding three cattle, three goats, and US$2,000.
“Dzingai once instructed us to list our bride price requirements, which we did and handed to him. He never honoured them. Now he has dumped my child for another wife—zvakanakawo here?” she lamented.
Dzingai did not deny owing his mother-in-law money and told the court he was willing to pay back.
“I am not denying that I owe her the money. I am planning to pay back the money. I can manage US$50 a month till I clear the debt,” he said.
Chief Makoni ruled that Dzingai pays the debt in instalments of US$130 for 11 months to clear the debt he owes his mother-in-law.
“US$50 per month is too little under the circumstances. You are being ordered to pay US$130 per month, and you have 11 months to pay. You have to work hard to pay back the debt,” ruled Chief Makoni.
Responding to the bride price claim, Dzingai told the court that it was Beulah who was causing problems in the marriage by refusing to relocate to their rural area.
“I told my wife that we need to build a homestead at our village and she refused. She said she will not stay in rural areas as she has a homestead built for her in Seke. So I found it impossible to continue staying together. I never divorced my wife, but she is the one refusing to move to the rural areas,” he claimed.
Beulah also told the court that Dzingai left her with nothing, and pleaded with the court to facilitate the sharing of property.
“When we were together, we acquired some beasts and household property. I am left with nothing to provide for the children,” she said.
Chief Makoni ruled that Dzingai pays damages of three beasts and three goats as there was no proof that he once had negotiations for marriage.
He also dismissed Beulah’s bid to share the property, saying the matter was not before the court, and she must have filled a separate application.
“Dzingai, that your wife is refusing to move to the village is not connected to the bride price payment. This court can only advise you to seek help from aunties and uncles from your side and her side. Dzingai was given a bride price list, but he never held negotiations with Sanyangores to marry Beulah, so he is ordered to just pay damages of three beasts and three goats.
‘‘The court cannot give a ruling on sharing of the property because the matter was not reported to this court.
“If Beulah want to share the property with Dzingai she should proceed to divorce him because as it stands their marriage still exists. Dzingai is ordered not to sale anything that was jointly acquired during the course of their marriage. Dzingai is ordered to meet Sheba’s US$190 cost of suit,” ruled the court.
