Alhaji Bako Uba Muhammad v. Alhaji Ado Muhammad Barma & Ors (2024)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

CHIDI NWAOMA UWA, JSC (Delivering the leading judgment)

The Court of Appeal, Kaduna Division (hereinafter referred to as the court below) in its judgment delivered on 7th July, 2017 which affirmed the decision of the Kano State High Court (hereinafter referred to as the trial court) delivered on 5th October, 2011 wherein the trial court entered judgment in a suit under the undefended list upheld the claims/reliefs by granting monetary awards to the respondents.

The background facts are that the respondents, who were the plaintiffs, on 22nd March, 2011 instituted an action under the undefended list procedure against the appellant at the trial court claiming several reliefs

as follows:

a. “The sum of N199,155,000.00 being the sum paid to him by the respondents for the supply of Dollars

b. The sum of $200,000 or its equivalent in the sum of N24,400,000.

c. 10% interest at court’s rate from the date of judgment to the time the whole sum is liquidated.

d. The cost of the action.

Upon being served the originating process, the appellant filed a counter affidavit where he disclosed that he is a shareholder in a company and the company is an agent of a disclosed principal and prayed the court to join the principal by transferring the suit to the general cause list.

After hearing the parties, the trial court in its judgment granted all the reliefs/claims of the respondents and awarded costs of N70,000.00 (Seventy Thousand Naira) against the appellant thus the appeal to the court below. At the close of the hearing, in a considered judgment, the court below dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the trial court.

Dissatisfied with the decision of the court below the appellant appealed to this court. The following issues were formulated for the determination of the appeal thus:

1. Whether the court below was right in affirming the decision of the trial court assuming jurisdiction to entertain the suit. (From ground 1)
2. Whether the court below was right in upholding that by the processes before the trial court the respondents were entitled to judgment under the Undefended List procedure. (From grounds 2 and 3).

In response, the respondents filed a preliminary objection (termed respondents notice of intention to rely upon a preliminary objection) challenging the competence of the amended notice of appeal dated 10th December, 2019 and deemed filed on 17th December, 2020 in which this court was urged to strike out the said notice of appeal as well as the appeal.

The grounds for the preliminary objection are as follows:

(i) The complaint in ground 1 of the appellants amended notice of appeal did not arise from the ratio decidendi of the judgment of the lower court therefrom rendering same incompetent, null and void ab initio.