Edith Ogbuli & Anor V. Aniemena Ogbuli & Anor (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

BADA, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the ruling of High Court of Anambra State holden at Onitsha in suit No. 0/14/97 Aniemena Ogbuli & 1 other (for themselves and on behalf of Ogbuli Nwawulu family Ogboli-Eke Onitsha) v. Edith Ogbuli & 1 Other. In the said ruling delivered on the 13th day of January, 2006, the learned trial Judge after hearing the application for amendment of statement of defence by the defendants now appellants refused it on the grounds that:

(1) the amendment if granted would overreach the plaintiffs.

(2) the amendment was not to bring evidence in line with pleadings.

(3) the amendment sought to plead new facts.

Dissatisfied with the said ruling the appellants now appealed to this Courts.

The learned counsel for the appellants formulated only one issue for determination as follows:-

“Whether the learned trial Judge was right in dismissing the appellants’ application for amendment.”

The learned counsel for the respondents on the other hand also formulated one issue for determination as follows:

“Whether the learned trial Judge was right in dismissing the respondents’ (sic) application for amendment of the statement of defence, having regard to all the circumstances of the case.”

At the hearing learned counsel for both parties adopted and relied on their respective briefs of argument.

The learned counsel for the respondents raised preliminary objection that the two grounds of appeal are incompetent.

The grounds upon which he based the objection are:

(1) Both grounds of appeal offend against Order 3 rule 2 of the Court of Appeal Rules in that they are devoid of the particulars and the nature of the error in law alleged.