Alhaji Ahmed Mohammed Grema V. Alhaji Ahmadu Janyun & Ors (2000)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ZAINAB. A. BULKACHUWA., J.C.A.

T

his is an appeal against the decision of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja whereby the Appellant was convicted for contempt of Court contrary to Section 155 of the Penal Code and sentenced to a term of imprisonment for 3 months or to a fine of N300.00 (Three Hundred Naira) in the alternative.

The appellant was to have been turbanned the Sarkin Hausawa of Abuja on 22nd day of February, 1998 when on the 21st day of February, 1998 the respondents applied and obtained an ex-parte order of interim Injunction restraining the appellant from presenting himself for the turbanning ceremony. The motion on notice was fixed for hearing on the 25th day of February, 1997. The interim ex-parte order was served on the appellant’s secretary.

The motion on notice was never heard, however the respondents filed a memorandum of settlement out of court dated 19th day of March, 1997 on 15th day of April, 1997. The Appellant then by a motion on notice, dated 9th day of April, 1997, asking the trial court to stop any consent judgment based on the said memorandum of settlement. This application was also never heard.

The trial Judge while considering the application for the consent judgment based on the memorandum of settlement declared it null and void as the provisions of the Constitution of the Northern Communities Association upon which the Office of Sarkin Hausawa was created was inconsistent with the provisions of Section 6(6) and Section 236 of the 1979 Constitution. On the 11th day of April, 1997 the Court adjourned the Case sine die.

Consequent upon the said adjournment, the Northern Communities Association of Abuja drafted, a new constitution and filed same at the Corporate Affairs commission. Based on this new constitution of the Association the appellant was turbanned Sarkin Hausawa, Abuja on the 3rd day of May, 1997.

On the 9th day of May, 1997 the respondents commenced committal proceedings against the appellant before the trial Court subsequent to which the appellant was convicted for contempt of court on the 2nd day of February, 1998.

Dissatisfied with the said decision, the appellant has now appealed to this Court in his notice of appeal dated 16th February, 1998. The 6 grounds of appeal as contained in the notice of appeal are produced below.

GROUNDS OF APPEAL
GROUND ONE:
The trial Court erred in law in convicting the appellant of contempt of court when there was no legal basis for the conviction particulars;
(i) There was no proof before the Lower Court of personal service on the appellant of the Ex-parte Order made on the 21st day of February, 1997.
(ii) Forms 48 and 49 under the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act were not served on the appellant.

GROUNDS TWO:
The learned trial Judge erred in law in holding that service effected on the Secretary of the appellant was good service on the appellant.

PARTICULARS
(i) The quasi-criminal nature of committal proceedings make personal service of restraining orders mandatory.
(ii) The certificate of service referred to by the learned trial Judge was not part of the material placed before the court for the determination of the committal proceedings.

GROUND THREE:
The learned trial Judge erred in law in retrospectively dispensing with the requirement of personal service of the restraining Order.

PARTICULARS