Mrs. Louisa A. Agu V. Central Bank of Nigeria (2016)
LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report
IGNATIUS IGWE AGUBE, J.C.A.
This Appeal is sequel to the Judgment of the Federal High Court, of Nigeria, Holden at Owerri which Judgment was delivered on the 8th day of April, 2014 in favour of the Plaintiff (now Respondent). It would be recalled that the Respondent as Plaintiff in the Lower Court by a writ of Summons dated 19th day of June, 2008 together with his Statement of Claim also dated the 19th day of June, 2008 and filed same date sought for the following Reliefs:
1. A Declaration that the Defendant being a non-staff of the Plaintiff has no legal right whatsoever to hold on to the Plaintiffs CB 34 Staff Quarters situate at the Central Bank of Nigeria Quarters, Trans Egbu, Owerri Imo State, Nigeria.
2. An Order of Court rendering the continuous occupation by the Defendant of the Plaintiffs Staff Quarter illegal since there is no Tenancy Agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the one hand, the Plaintiff, the Defendant and the Plaintiffs erstwhile Agent on the other hand.
3. An Order of Court directing the Defendant to vacate the Plaintiffs
1
Staff Quarters immediately to enable the Staff allocated the Quarters under the Monetization Policy of the Federal Government of Nigeria take immediate occupation of same as the staff had already paid up and no longer enjoys housing allowance from the Plaintiff.
4. The sum of N1,560,000.00 (One Million Five Hundred and Sixtythousand Naira) only, being rent arrears from year 1996 to year 2007.
5. The sum of N3m (Three Million Naira) only as general damages for trespass.”
Accompanying the Originating processes as aforestated are Annexures A and B documents captioned NOTICE OF OWNERS INTENTION TO APPLY TO RECOVER POSSESSION DATED THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2004 AND IMO STATE HOUSING CORPORATION CONFIRMATION OF OWNERSHIP RE: CENTRAL BANK HOUSES dated 22nd Oct, 2003; Witnesses Summons on Oath and written Address in support of her case.
Upon being served with the Plaintiffs Originating processes and the annexed documents the Defendant gave NOTICE OF ENTRY OF CONDITIONAL APPEARANCE dated and filed on the 26th of June, 2008. It would appear from what can be seen at page 38 of the Records
2
that the Defendant filed an Application for enlargement of time on the 12th day of October 2010 for the Defendant to file her statement of Defence and Counter-Claim together with accompanying documents and to deem her said Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim as duly filed and served on the Plaintiff (now Respondent).
By her said Counter-Claim, the Defendant (now Appellant) sought for the following Reliefs:
1. A declaration that the hasty and forceful eviction or ejection of the Counter-Claimant by the Defendant upon the striking out of its suit without waiting for an order of Court was illegal, unconstitutional and a breach of implied covenant in leases.
2. The sum of N10 Million Naira being special damages.
PARTICULARS OF SPECIAL DAMAGES:
(i) Cost of repairs, Renovations and making the premises habitable at the instruction of the Defendants Agent N2.5 Million Naira.
(ii) Cost of properties damages in the course of the unlawful eviction of N7.5 Million Naira.
3. General, punitive and exemplary damages suffered in the cause of unlawful eviction N5 Million Naira.
4. Interest
3
at the rate of 30% annually until the Judgment sum s satisfied.
The Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim were also accompanied by the Witnesses Statements on Oath of Mrs. Louisa A. Agu (the Defendant/Counter-Claimant, a list of witnesses sought to be called and documents sought to be relied upon at the trial.
Upon being served with the Defendants processes, the Plaintiff through one Favour Chibuzor Ndubinsi (Miss) the Litigation Secretary of the Law Chambers of Chief George O. Aigbomian, the learned Counsel for the Plaintiff deposed to what was termed.
FURTHER AFFIDAVIT IN REPLY TO THE DEFENDANTS STATEMENT OF DEFENCE.
On the 15th April, 2013, the Plaintiff after incessant adjournments, filed a motion on Notice pursuant to Order 8 Rule 1 and Order 19 Rules 2 and 15 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2009.and under the inherent jurisdiction of the trial Federal High Court. The Motion dated 12th April, 2013 prayed for entry of Judgment for the Plaintiff and an Order allowing the Plaintiff/Applicant to prove her Claim and a further Order striking out the Counter Claim of the Defendant for want of
4
Leave a Reply