Chief S. C. Odogwu V. Daniel Amzaranda (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ABDU ABOKI, J.C.A. (Delivered the Leading judgment)

This Appeal is against the Judgment of the High Court 1 Suleja Niger State delivered on 20th September 2007, by Hon. Justice Oseni Oyewo.

The brief fact of the case is that the Appellant and the Respondent were friends and colleagues who had worked together for a number of years at UTC Suleja/Abuja. In 1998, the Respondent agreed to buy the house of the Appellant known as Plot 24 GRA Suleja and the Appellant agreed to sell same at the purchase price of N900, 000. 00 (Nine Hundred Thousand Naira). The Plaintiff confessed that he could not raise the agreed sum en bloc but that he would pay instalmentally. The Plaintiff made the first deposit of N105, 000. 00 (One Hundred and Five Thousand Naira) and also the sum of N62, 000. 00 (Sixty-Two Thousand Naira) on 16/12/98. Two receipts were tendered to evidence these deposits as Exhibits C and D respectively. The Appellant acknowledged the receipt of the total sum of N244, 725. 00 (Two Hundred and Forty-four Thousand, Seven Hundred and Twenty-five Naira). Thereafter the Respondent stopped payment in 1999 whilst the Appellant and his family continued to live in the property.

The Respondent instituted an action against the Appellant in Suleja praying for specific performance of the contract. The trial Court found in favour of the Respondent, refusing the first leg of the claim which asked for a declaration that the transaction between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is credit Sale for which property has passed to the Plaintiff/Respondent; but only granted an order of specific performance directing the Defendant/Appellant to conclude with the Plaintiff/Respondent the contract of sale of his property by accepting the balance of N646, 625.00 from the Plaintiff/Respondent and the Defendant/Appellant thereafter executing a Deed of Assignment/Transfer of the property to the Respondent putting him and handing over all documents evidencing ownership of the property to the Respondent.

The Defendant/Appellant being dissatisfied with this Judgment filed a Notice of Appeal dated the 14th day of November, 2007. The Appellant also filed his Brief of Argument dated the 8th day of April, 2008 on the same date. The Respondent’s Brief of Argument dated the 2nd day of June, 2008 was filed on the 5th day of June, 2008.

From the four Grounds of Appeal contained in the Notice of Appeal, a lone issue was distilled on behalf of the Appellant for the determination of this Appeal.

The issue reads thus:

“Did the Plaintiff perform his obligations under the Agreement to entitle him to the remedy of specific performance?”

On behalf of the Respondent a lone issue was also formulated for the determination of this Appeal thus:

“Whether the lower court was right in its order of specific performance in view of the evidence before the court?”

I have carefully perused the issues distilled by both the Appellant and Respondent for the determination of this Appeal and I observed that they are similar and all relates to the Grounds of Appeal filed by the Appellant; however I shall adopt the issue as formulated by the Appellant for the determination of this Appeal.

Issue One

“Did the Plaintiff perform his obligations under the Agreement to entitle him to the remedy of specific performance?”

Learned Counsel for the Appellant, P. O. Okolo submitted that the question is whether the learned trial judge was entitled to give the order of specific performance as he did. He queried whether it can be said that the Plaintiff/Respondent has satisfied all the conditions for the grant of the order of specific performance.