Vincent Standard Steel Industries Limited & Anor V. Lead Bank Limited & Ors (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MARY U. PETER-ODILI J.C.A.

The Plaintiffs now Appellants claimed against the Defendants now Respondents at the High Court of Justice, Federal Capital Territory, Presided over by S. D. Baje J. the following reliefs as per the Statement of Claim:-

i. Declaration that the purported Deed of Tripartite Legal Mortgage registered as No.FC.16 at page 16 in Volume 13Mise on the 21st February 2000 in the Federal Capital Territory Lands Registry, Ahuja between Vincent Standard Steel Industries Limited, Chief Vincent Nwankwo and Lead Merchant Bank Limited was never executed by Chief Vincent Nwankwo as the Surety.

ii. Declaration that the said Deed of Tripartite Legal Mortgage registered as NO. FC.16 at page 16in Volume 13 Misc on the 21st February, 2000, in the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja Lands Registry Abuja between Vincent Standard Steel Industries Limited, Chief Vincent Nwankwo, and Lead Merchant Bank Limited is null and void and of no effect.

iii. An order compelling the 1st Defendant to return the Certificate of Occupancy No. FCT/ ABU/ AN133 and the duly registered Power of Attorney in respect of the property of the Plaintiffs.

iv. An order compelling the 1st Defendant to execute a deed of release of the above property in favour of the Plaintiffs.

v. Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendant from selling, assigning or doing anything inconsistent with the

Plaintiffs on the property covered by Certificate of Occupancy No. FCT/ABU/AN133.

The Plaintiffs filed their Statement of Claim, while the Defendants filed their Joint Statement of Defence. The 2nd Plaintiff gave evidence on behalf of the 1st Plaintiff and tendered documents which were admitted as Exhibits. There were Exhibits A, 8, C1, e2, 0, El, F, G, H, H2, H3, H4, J, J2, K, M, Ni, N2, P, Pl,PW2, R, S. The Defendants gave evidence through one witness and tendered some documents which were admitted as Exhibits and these are Exhibits U and U2. Thereafter, counsel addressed the Court and the Court delivered its judgment on 23rd February 2004 dismissing the Plaintiffs’ claim and being dissatisfied the Plaintiffs have appealed to this Court.

FACTS:-

The Appellants as Plaintiffs at the trial Court claim against the Respondents as Defendants as shown in Part 1 of this brief. The grievances of the Appellants against the Respondent are quite simple. Sometime in 1996, the Appellants applied for N40 million import finance facility from the 1st Respondent. The 1st Respondent granted the facility and the tenure was for 160 days. The interest payable was 21% per annum and repayment on the arrival of supplies/ documents or at maturity whichever is earlier. The Appellants reduced Exhibit A, which is the personal Guarantee of the 2nd Applicant. Exhibit B is the Insurance Cover as required by the Central Bank of Nigeria. The Letters of Credit were tendered and admitted in Evidence as C1 and C2. The further contention of the Appellants was that on the consignment of the goods, there was hardship, as the ship sank and the goods destroyed. Exhibit D is the fax message and Exhibits El and E2 – Letters of Suspension of them. The Appellants contended further that after the loss from the sunk ship, they applied for a further import facility of N100 million. This is Exhibit G.

The 1st Respondent replied and approved only N57 million fresh facilities, but on the condition that the Appellants must secure the facility with a property in Abuja or Lagos Exhibit H is the letter to this effect. That upon the insistence of the appellants, that N57 million approved was too small, the 2nd Appellant refused to sign the Deed of Tripartite Mortgage.

The three copies of the said deed unsigned were tendered and admitted as Exhibit H2, H3 and H4. The 2nd appellant then accepted the N60 million approved and consequently, a Power of Attorney in respect of the property, and a tripartite mortgage were duly executed. These are Exhibits K, 2 and K respectively.

It was further contended for the Appellants that shortly after the due execution of Exhibit K, the deed of legal mortgage in respect of the later transaction relating to the N60 million, the 1st Respondent caused to be published in THIS DAY Newspaper of 14th August, 2000 auction notice of the said property. After several messages and correspondences by both parties to resolve the matter without any success, the Appellant proceeded to the trial court for the resolution.