Alhaji Isiyaku Yakubu & Anor V. Ministry of Works & Transport Adamawa State & Ors. (2005)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

IFEYINWA CECILIA NZEAKO, J.C.A.

The Appellants in this appeal were the Plaintiffs in the suit which they filed at the High Court of Justice, Yola, Adamawa State of Nigeria on 20th June 1993. The claim arose out of events which occurred some time in 1984. Compensation was, as admitted by the Respondents, payable to the Appellants by the Respondents by reason of the Respondents causing the Appellants’ buildings in Yola metropolis to be demolished. The Appellants had valid Certificates of occupancy and approved building plans of the property in question. The Appellants’ Amended Statement of Claim sets out in detail the events, their sequence, the claim and the grounds thereof. I will later set out relevant paragraphs of the statement of claim.

Although the Respondents entered an appearance and filed a defence, they did not defend the suit at the trial. At the said trial, the Appellants adduced evidence, tendering series of documentary evidence which were not controverted. In his judgment, the learned trial Judge granted the Appellants’ claims in part against the 1st Respondent alone and refused their other claims said by the Appellants to be 75% of their claims.

Dissatisfied, the Appellants have appealed to this Court on 19/10/95. Later, by leave of the Court, granted on 12/7/2001, they filed a further amended Notice of appeal on 27/9/2002.

The Appellants, filed their brief of argument on 9/8/99. This, they later amended by leave of this Court granted on 29/9/2002.

The Respondents, inspite of being duly served with the processes and hearing notices, failed to file any brief of argument and did not attend Court during any of the proceedings. The Appellants on 3/4/2003 obtained leave of this Court to argue the appeal exparte in the absence of any brief of argument from the Respondents. Though served with the order of the Court and hearing notices, the Respondents took no steps to file their brief or appear at the hearing of the appeal on 18/1/2005.

This Court thus heard the appeal, based only on the Appellants’ brief of argument alone.

There are 5 grounds in the Further Amended Grounds of Appeal with their particulars. They are as follows:-

GROUND 1:

The learned trial Court Judge erred in law and when he reduced the interest rate payable on the sum of N1,447,409.34 from 1st July, 1992 to date of payment, from 32% to 10%.

PARTICULARS OF ERROR

(a) There was no basis for the reduction in the rate of interest payable in view of the clear provisions of S.29(4)(b) and S.29(5) of the Land Use Act 1978 which provides that interest payable shall be at prevailing bank rate.

(b) The Defendants had no defence to the Plaintiffs’ Claims, which stood unchallenged and should have been granted. See F.C.D.A. Vs. NAIBI (1990)3 N.W.L.R. Part 138 page 270 at 272 Ratio 1.

GROUND 2: