An Dollars Oil (Nigeria) Limited (2015)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

IGNATIUS IGWE AGUBE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The Appellant as Claimant in the High Court of Abia State, in the Aba Judicial Division, Holden at Aba took out a Writ of Summons and in its particulars and that of the Statement of Claim dated and filed together on the 23rd day of May, 2011, sought for the following Reliefs in paragraph 30 thereof:

“WHEREFORE the Claimant Claims against the Defendant as follows:

A. A Declaration of this Honourable Court that the continued detention by the Defendant of the Claimant’s Deed of Assignment registered as No. 15, PAGE 15, VOLUME 114 of the Land Deeds Registry, Uyo Akwa Ibom State and Customary Right of Occupancy NO. ITR/039/81 of the former Cross River State, now Akwa Ibom State both relating to the Claimants Filling Station at Uyo now Akwa Ibom State even when the loan for which the said documents were handed over to the Defendant for search was not given to Claimant is totally unlawfully, barbaric, unwarranted and illegal.

B. An Order commanding the Defendant to release and immediately deliver up to the Claimant, her Deed of Assignment registered as No. 15, PAGE 15 VOLUME 114 of the Land Deeds Registry, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, and Customary Right of Occupancy NO.ITR/039/81 of the former Cross River State, now Akwa Ibom State which are still being wrongfully and intentionally detained by the Defendant and which the Defendant has refused to release to the Claimant despite several demands on her for their re-delivery.

C. The Sum of N10,000,000 (Ten Million Naira) being general damages against the Defendant for detinue and wrongful detention of the Claimants Deed of Assignment registered as No. 15, PAGE 15, VOLUME 114 of the Land Deeds Registry, Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, and Customary Right of Occupancy NO. ITR/039/81 of the former Cross River State, now Akwa Ibom State.

D. 10% interest on the judgment sum from the date of judgment until the judgment debt is fully liquidated.”

Issues were joined by the Defendant filing her Statement of Defence dated 21st day of June, 2011 denying the Claimant’s Claim. At the hearing, the Claimant/Respondent called a Sole Witness (Mr. Dickson Okoroji) who testified and tendered 6 (six) documents marked Exhibits “A-F”. He was not cross-examined by the Learned Counsel for the Defendant/Appellant who elected not to do so.

The Defendant/Appellant on her part also called a sole witness (Mr. Kingsley Uche Njoku) who was said to have simply adopted and repeated wholly the averments contained in the Defendant’s Statement of Defence as well as the Rejoinder of the Defendant to the Claimant’s Reply to the Statement of Defence. The Rejoinder was said not to have raised any new issues except the challenge to the claimant to produce a Letter of Demand for the documents apart from the one written by the Claimant’s Lawyer which challenge the claimant was said to have met by tendering the letter in that behalf written by the M/D of the Claimant dated 3/12/2004 before the institution of the action.

The DW1 also tendered the documents pleaded but Counsel to the Claimant objected to the tendering of the Judgment in Suit No.LD/2069/2005 on the ground that it was not certified but the objection was overruled and the judgment was accordingly marked Exhibit J. I must however confess that having gone through the entire Record of Proceedings, I cannot find where the witnesses testified. However, from what is recorded at page 170 of the Records, the Defendant tendered 13(thirteen) documents in support of her case.

At the close of the respective case of the parties, Written Addresses were exchanged and adopted which culminated in the Judgment of the Learned Trial Judge (Hon. Justice Onuoha A.K. Ogwe delivered on Tuesday, May the 7th, 2013; granting Reliefs A, B and C but refusing to grant D.

Dissatisfied with that Judgment, Bertraim Faotu Esq., of Eluethera Chambers, 64 Hospital Road, Aba, on behalf of the Appellants gave Notice of Appeal with Two Grounds dated 20th day of June, 2013 but filed on the 21st day of June, 2013. For record purposes, the Two Grounds of Appeal are hereunder set down with their particulars as follows:

“GROUNDS UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BROUGHT TO THE COURT OF APPEAL

GROUND ONE: