Daniel Dibal V. Kingsley Eguma (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

HABEEB ADEWALE OLUMUYIWA ABIRU, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The Appellant commenced the action in the lower Court against the Respondent and his claims were for (i) the sum of N1.8 Million being the value of his car taken by the Respondent; and (ii) the sum of N180,000.00 as general damages and the cost of prosecuting the action.

The case of the Appellant on the pleadings was that the Respondent is a car dealer and that sometime in the year 2009 both of them held discussions on the possibility of the Respondent assisting him to sell two Honda cars and that pursuant to the discussion he gave one of the Honda cars, a Honda Accord 2003 Model with a V6 Engine valued at N1.8 Million to the Respondent for sale.

It was his case that the Respondent collected the car in August of 2009 and did not return either with the money or car and that when he made several demands for the return of his car or for the payment of the money, the Respondent informed him that armed robbers snatched the car from him on his way to Abuja. It was his case that on the 9th of August, 2009, the Respondent pleaded for patience and gave him a written

1

undertaking to pay the monetary value of the car, but he has waited in vain for the redemption of the undertaking. It was his case that he had intended to plough the money received from the sale of the vehicle back into business and that he has been unjustly treated by the Respondent.

?

The case of the Respondent in his defence was that the Honda Accord car was not valued at N1.8 Million and that he never told the Appellant that he could sell same for N1.8 Million and neither did he undertake to pay the Appellant the sum of N1.8 Million as the monetary value of the car. The Respondent admitted agreeing to assist the Appellant to sell the Honda car and it was his case that he got a buyer in Gwarimpa, Abuja and that he informed the Appellant that he was taking the car to Abuja and that the Appellant gave him the go ahead to do so.

It was his case that he was attacked by armed robbers in Gwarimpa Abuja and the car was snatched from him and that he reported the incident to the Police in Abuja and that the armed robbers were subsequently arrested by the Police. It was his case that the Police called him for identification of the robbers and he identified the

2

robber who pointed the gun at his head and that he took an uncle of the Appellant with him to the Police Station to confirm all these incidents. It was his case that the Appellant reported him at the Metropolitan Police Command in Panteka, Kaduna and that the policemen at this Police Station forced him into writing an undertaking to pay for the car but that he never undertook to pay any sum of money to the Appellant for the car as the police were still investigating the matter. It was his case that the Appellant also reported the matter to his employers who advised him to seek ways of settling same and that he shall contend that he acted as agent for the Appellant when he took the car to Abuja for sale.

The matter was heard on the merits and the Appellant testified as the sole witness in proof of his case and he tendered exhibits and the Respondent also testified as the sole witness in proof of his defence and he also tendered exhibits. At the conclusion of trial and after the final addresses of the Counsel to the parties, the lower Court entered judgment dismissing the claims of the Appellant. The lower Court, after traversing through the respective

3

cases of the parties and the exhibits tendered, stated in the judgment thus: