Abu Dhabi Primary School rejected the case due to lack of evidence

A man asks his wife to pay installments for a gift car

The Abu Dhabi Court of First Instance ruled to reject the lawsuit of a student's husband to compel his wife to pay installments for a car that he financed for her as a debt, while the wife confirmed that the car was given to her by her husband on the occasion of her birthday, and that it does not work until she can pay monthly installments.

In the details, the bulk of the lawsuit filed against his wife, demanding that her be obligated to pay the value of a car owned by his wife, and he pays the financing installments in a total amount of 107 thousand and 977 dirhams from March 2018 until the date of filing the case, and obligating her to pay what he intends to be due to the bank in installments until the end Funding in March 2023, and also obligating it to pay the plaintiff 20 thousand dirhams in compensation for the material and moral damages suffered by him as a result of the defendant's failure to pay the amounts subject to the lawsuit to the plaintiff and the legal interest on the amount of 12%.

The plaintiff indicated that he has a marital relationship with the defendant and she has asked him to finance a car murabaha with a total financing of 107 thousand and 977 dirhams, so that he is committed to repay it in monthly installments in the amount of 2003 dirhams, and the marital relationship was the moral impediment to taking guarantees, and the defendant took advantage of that, and refused When he asked her to pay the amounts, she delayed and refused to pay, and presented a scanned copy of a license showing that the owner was the defendant and a photocopy of the bank of the car financing scheme in his name.

During the consideration of the case, the plaintiff asserted that the marital relationship still exists between him and his wife, but that there are other lawsuits between them, which are personal and civil status suits, indicating that it was agreed with his wife to finance a vehicle for her, provided that she returns its value later through her father, while the wife denied Her husband said, indicating that he gifted the vehicle to her on her birthday.

The court clarified in the merits of its ruling that the plaintiff’s financing of the vehicle and paying its price in monthly installments to the bank does not prove that the defendant owes the plaintiff that amount, especially since the plaintiff could not prove that he had given it the vehicle on the basis of debt that it returns the price, and admitted that there is no evidence He has, and his statements were sent in this regard and devoid of evidence, and the court has proven that the marital bond still exists between the two parties, and that the defendant does not work while she is a housewife, which leads to this case losing its basis, and the court ruled to reject the case while obliging the plaintiff Fees and charges.

Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news