MARY PHIRI writes
A 42-YEAR-OLD woman of Overspill settlement in Ndola has sued a 26-year-old man for deflowering her 22 year old daughter.
In this matter, Catherine Mwange sued Davison Kapengwe of Chipulukusu Township for compensation for damages of virginity of her daughter.
Mwange told the Chipulukusu Local court that Kapengwe impregnated her daughter and accepted responsibility but later denied being the father of the child.
She said when she found out that her daughter was pregnant, she summoned Kapengwe for a meeting and he accepted responsibility. He paid K50 as admission of guilt.
“He later on gave me a K400 to add on my tomato business that I was doing to help support my daughter because he would not take her at that moment,” she added.
The case came before local court presiding Magistrates Juliet Bwalya sitting with Nsama Nsofu and Ntembe Sakala.
She said he was very supportive with everything but recently he called and asked her to stop calling him and that he would not support her daughter anymore.
In defence, Kapengwe told the court that he had accepted the pregnancy and he was ready for anything but after wards he had learnt through her friend that the child she was carrying was not his.
He said he had been hearing some rumours that the girl had another man but he would not believe until her friend confided in him that the child she was carrying was not his.
Kapengwe said when he asked her why she lied, she told him that her mother had impressed upon her to insist that he was responsible.
He said he stopped supporting her because he knew he was being cheated and could not take it anymore. Musonda Chisenga, the girl in question, told the court that Kapenwge was the only man she had ever slept with and she had no doubts that he was the father of the child she was carrying.
She told the court that she slept with him four times in October last year at a church near their home, and when she missed her periods she knew it was him.
In passing judgment, the court ordered Kapengwe to be paying K100 every month and ordered him to start buying clothes for the unborn baby.
The court also ruled that after the baby is born, they should take it take it for DNA testing to establish the paternity of the child.
