ZIMBABWE – Financial constraints have pressured a Harare woman to keep demanding for money from her ex-husband.
Ndaizivei Hunda supposedly financially dependent on her former husband Victor Mariga for the upkeep of her child, dragged him to Harare civil court for a maintenance upward variation.
“My request is maintenance upward variation from US$120 to US$300.
“This is because my child is starting to go to school next year, so school fees and transport money is needed,” she said.
In response, Mariga said:
“Her request is just too much for me because I have more responsibilities already.
“When the initial maintenance order was placed, I had not married again.
“Now I have another wife who is expecting my second child in January.
“My salary is only US$380 and it cannot go along with the US$300 Hunda wants for the upkeep of our child.
The presiding magistrate, Marehwanazvo Gofa dismissed the application of maintenance upward variation.
Trust is like toothpaste, once it gets out of the tube, you will never get it back in, so goes the metaphor. This proved true after an Econet Wireless (Pvt) engineer trusted an unemployed man to sell his valuables worth $22 500 on his behalf, but only got $12 950 from the proceeds.
For that reason, Pardon Nyamukura yesterday approached the magistrates’ court for legal recourse to recover $8 425 from Tawanda Sydney Machingura (46).
Machingura was not asked to plead when he appeared before Harare magistrate Elijah Makomo facing theft of trust property charges.
Machingura’s freedom bid was thwarted by the State led by prosecutor Sharon Mashavira, who opposed bail for the accused.
Magistrate Makomo remanded the accused in custody to Wednesday, with Machingura notifying the court that he would apply for bail.
Allegations are that on January 20 this year Nyamukura gave Machingura a Suzuki motor bike, two air compressors, four jack hammers, an air hose and other accessories to sell on his behalf for a total value of $22 500.
The initial agreement was that the accused would get a five percent commission of the money realised.
Further allegations are that the accused sold all the property but remitted $12 950 and converted an amount of $8 425 to his use excluding $1 125 which was his commission.