Man Demands US$11,000 After Family Takes Back Son

A Zimbabwean man based in Durban, South Africa, has taken his late girlfriend’s family before Chief Mutasa’s community court, demanding US$11,000 in compensation after they allegedly took back the son he had raised and educated for several years.

Tonderai Nyambudzi told the court that he had spent years paying school fees and providing for the boy, believing he was securing his biological son’s future, only for the child to later be reclaimed by his maternal relatives on customary grounds. Nyambudzi said the dispute began when his girlfriend became pregnant while he was preparing to formalise their relationship through customary marriage.

“While I was paying bride price, a spirit manifested through one of her relatives and declared that she was not supposed to get married,” Nyambudzi told the court. He said he was subsequently told that he could only take the child after the woman had given birth, forcing him to leave her at her family home during the pregnancy. The woman later died, leaving the child in the care of her relatives.

Nyambudzi said that when he later sought custody of the boy, the family told him he had to pay ‘chiredzwa’, also known as ‘maredzwa’, before the child could be released to him. He said he paid R15,000, which was worth about US$800 at the time. The boy was then in Grade Four. After taking custody, Nyambudzi said he assumed responsibility for the child's education, upkeep and general welfare.

However, he claims that years later the Machekanzombe family took the boy back, arguing that he did not belong to Nyambudzi but was connected to a family spirit. Nyambudzi told the court that the family’s position was based on a customary and spiritual claim involving an alleged historical killing within the Machekanzombe family.

According to his account, the family claimed that the spirit of the deceased person had subsequently been symbolically married to the child's mother and that the boy therefore belonged to that spiritual lineage. The Machekanzombe family subsequently refunded the approximately US$800 Nyambudzi had paid as maredzwa.

Nyambudzi, however, argued that the refund did not cover the money he had spent raising and educating the child over the years. He is now seeking US$11,000 in compensation.

Family disputes his account

The Machekanzombe family disputed Nyambudzi’s version of events. Family representative Danai Machekanzombe told the court that the dispute had already been dealt with by Chief Mutasa earlier this year. He said Nyambudzi appeared before the traditional court in February and told it that he no longer wanted to keep the child. “His position before this court was clear. He said he no longer wanted the child and that what he wanted was a refund of the money he had paid as ‘maredzwa’,” Machekanzombe said.

He said the family sourced the money and refunded Nyambudzi in March.

“We are therefore surprised that he has returned demanding US$11,000,” he said.

Machekanzombe said the family then took the child back because they considered themselves responsible for his welfare. He rejected the compensation claim, arguing that Nyambudzi had voluntarily surrendered the child and had only sought reimbursement of the maredzwa payment.

Chief Mutasa refers financial claim

After hearing both sides, Chief Mutasa said Nyambudzi’s financial claim would first have to be properly verified. The traditional leader advised him to approach the Small Claims Court, where evidence of the money allegedly spent on the child's education and upkeep could be independently examined.

Chief Mutasa also suggested that, depending on the outcome, the child could potentially contribute towards settling any amount that might ultimately be found to be due, given that he was the beneficiary of the education and support. The dispute highlights the complex intersection between customary practices, family responsibility and formal legal remedies when questions of child custody and financial claims arise. The US$11,000 claim has not been established by the court, and the competing accounts remain disputed.

Zimbabwe man demands US$11,000 compensation