Adamu Garin Buzu V. Garba Garabi (2000)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

UMOREN, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court of Justice, Yobe State, sitting in its appellate jurisdiction Coram Hon. Justice B. S. Gujba Ali Garba delivered on 23rd December, 1996. The respondent as plaintiff instituted an action against the appellant as the defendant before the Area Court, Nangere claiming a farmland, which he alleged “has been in his possession for forty years”.

The Trial Area Court entered judgment for the respondent. Appellant being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Area Court, appealed against the said decision of the Area Court to the Fika Upper Area Court, Potiskurn. The Upper Area Court after hearing the appellant reversed the decision of the Area Court and entered judgment for the appellant.

The respondent now dissatisfied with the decision of the Upper Area Court Fika, appealed to the High Court of Justice of Yobe State in its appellate jurisdiction against the decision of the Fika Upper Area Court Potiskum. The High Court of Yobe State in its appellate jurisdiction in its judgment delivered on 23/12/96 allowed the appeal and set aside the decision of Fika Upper Area Court Pokiskum.

Dissatisfied with the decision of that High Court, that the appellant has appealed to this Court of Appeal on the 10th January, 1997, on four grounds of appeal which are set out below:-

GROUND 1

1 The learned Judges of the High Court erred in law when they held inter alia that “In view of the above, we are of the view that the appellant was not given a fair hearing by the Fika Upper Area Court Potiskum” and thereby came to a wrong decision, which led to a miscarriage of justice.

PARTICULARS OF ERROR IN LAW:

1. The Upper Area Court Fika did not deny the respondent the right of fair hearing as wrongly held by the lower court.
2. There were previous adjournments before the Fika Upper Area Court Potiskum at the instance of the respondent.
3. On the date when the matter came up for hearing before the Upper Area Court Potiskum, the respondent did not appear in court in spite of the fact that he was aware that the matter was adjourned against that date and there was no reason for his absence in court
4. The lower court was therefore wrong when it held that the respondent was denied the right of fair hearing by the Fika Upper Area court.

Alternatively

GROUND 2

The learned Judges of the High Court of Justice of Yobe-State erred in law when they held that the respondent was denied the right of fair hearing by Fika Upper Area Court Potiskum but did not make an order for retrial.

PARTICULARS OF ERROR IN LAW:

1. Having held that the respondent was denied the right to fair hearing by the Fika Upper Area Court Potiskum the learned Judges ought to have remitted the case back to the Upper Area Court for a re-trial.

GROUND 3

The learned Judges of the lower court erred in law when having held inter alia “on this ground of appeal we agree with the learned counsel for the respondent that where a ground of appeal complains of error in law without supplying the particulars of error the ground is incompetent in law. Therefore, there is no need for us to go into it” (page 6 of the record of proceedings of the lower court) and yet held at page 7 of its judgment thus, “Also by Order 2 Rule 8 after the appellant has complied with the requirements under order 2 Rules 1, 2 and 3 then fix a date for hearing of the appeal after the respondent was duly (sic) served with the notice and grounds of appeal by the appellant. All the above requirements of the law were not complied with by both the respondent and the lower court”.