Ali Maina Mobar V. Ibrahim Ali (2001)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

A. MANGAJI, J.C.A.

On 15th June, 1998 Hon. Justice I. S. Bdliya delivered a judgment in Suit No. M/92/97 wherein he dismissed the claim filed by the appellant as plaintiff against the respondent. His reason for so dismissing the claim was that the appellant totally failed to prove his case as no evidence was adduced during the trial establishing the averments contained in the pleading. The appellant was aggrieved by the decision.

He accordingly filed a notice of appeal containing two grounds dated 26/6/98.

In due compliance with the rules of this court, parties by their counsel, filed and exchanged briefs of argument. In the appellant’s brief of argument, two issues were identified as arising for determination from the two grounds of appeal.

The issues are couched thus:-

“(1) Whether the trial court is legally right to have dismissed the plaintiff’s claim inspite of the admitted facts in paragraph 6 of the appellant’s statement of claim and paragraph 5(b) of the statement of defence; (sic) without regard to the principle of law that facts admitted need no further proof.

(b) Whether from the circumstances of this case the appellant had led evidence in proving his unlawful arrest and detention so as to entitle him to obtain judgment before the trial court.”

The respondent on his part identified two, but very dissimilar issues. The issues are:

(a) Whether the learned trial Judge was right in holding that mere complaint to the Police is not sufficient to warrant a liability on the part of the respondent.

(b) Whether the learned trial Judge correctly directed himself as to the main issues before the court having regard to the pleadings and weight of evidence.”

Dissimilar as the two sets of issues are, the consideration of each set will definitely determine the controversy involved in the other. Which is to say that whichever set of issues is considered, the determination of it will inevitably answer the other set of issues. I shall in the event consider the issues formulated by the appellant and in doing so address the issues identified by the respondent.

The facts which resulted in the taking of the writ of summons by the plaintiff appear simple and straight forward. The defendant had a disagreement with the appellant over an alleged debt. The defendant said the plaintiff owned him the sum N22,000.00. As a result, the defendant filed an action against the plaintiff at the Upper Area Court, Maiduguri claiming the said sum. At that Court, and supposedly applying Islamic law of evidence, the Upper Area Court gave the plaintiff the Holy Quran to subscribe to in denial of the debt. Plaintiff accordingly swore on the Holy Quran and the suit was dismissed. The defendant’s case was that after the decision of the Upper Area Court and whenever by chance he met the plaintiff, the latter would abuse him in Kanuri language to the hearing of the public likening him to a thief and “wizard.” Defendant said whenever the plaintiff made those invectives his blood pressure would rise and cause him considerable worry. Not able to bear it, the defendant reported the plaintiff at the Bulaburin Police Station soliciting for the intervention of the Police. In his words, “I told the Police I was after peace. I wanted the Police to settle me and the plaintiff.”

With the intervention of the Police and defendant’s friends, the plaintiff and the defendant signed a truce to maintain cordial relationship among them.

The plaintiff, after leaving the Police Station, decided to take a writ of summons against the defendant claiming the following reliefs: