Jinvo Voro V. Nyara Votoh (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

SAIDU TANKO HUSSAINI, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an Appeal against the Ruling delivered at the High Court of Justice, Jalingo Taraba State on the 7th November, 2013 in Suit No. TRSJ/11/2011.

The appellant was the defendant in the action instituted by the Respondent as Plaintiff at the High Court vide the Writ of Summons taken out and filed on the 2nd February, 2011.

By the endorsement on the Writ Summons, the Plaintiff now Respondent claimed among other reliefs, a declaration, that he is entitled to the statutory right of Occupancy over the land measuring 13.76 hectares lying and situate at the Southern side of the UMCH Secretariat, Mile Six, Lassandi Ward, Jalingo described as being bounded in the North and East by the land of Christopher Majo, on the West by Jauro Mallum and at the Southern end by the land of Victor Tako hence a further claim for injunction restraining the defendant (Appellant), his servant, workmen and agents from interfering with the ownership and possession of the land by the plaintiff.

Before the commencement of trial, parties on both sides filed and exchanged pleadings pursuant to

the extant rules i.e. the Taraba State High Court Civil Procedure Rules 1997. Respondent thereafter opened his case with the evidence of Christopher Majo on the 17/6/2011 as Pw1 and concluded his evidence on the 23/2/2012 having also submitted himself to cross examination taken that same day.

Meanwhile at the sitting of Court on the 7th December, 2011 the lower or trial Court by order made directed on the plaintiff to take steps to regularize his papers as it affect other witnesses which the plaintiff intended to call at the hearing. He was to do so on or before the next date of adjournment i.e. 23/1/2012. Defendant was to do likewise upon plaintiffs papers being served on him in line with the new High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules of 2011 of Taraba State.

Pursuant to that Order of Court, the Plaintiff/Respondent, by the Motion dated the 20th January, 2012 and filed on the 23/1/2012 prayed for an order among others, extending the time within which to file and serve his list of witnesses and witnesses Statement on Oath. That application was granted as evident by the enrolled Order of Court (page 53 of record) issued on the 3rd May, 2012

at the High Court hence hearing resumed with the evidence of Pw2, Pw3 and Pw4. See pages 74 ? 82 of the record of Appeal.

At the close of respondent?s (Plaintiff?s) case his counsel by the application made viva voce requested for a date to enable him sum up his case. The trial Court granted the application without hesitation amidst opposition from Counsel for the Appellant (defendant) and adjourned the case to the 18/7/2013 for that purpose.

See pages 82 ? 84 of the printed record.

Notwithstanding the order of Court made as above, the Appellant, on the 8/7/2013 put in a written application to Court by way of Motion on Notice together with an affidavit and other relevant papers wherein he prayed for the reliefs as follows:

1. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court granting the defendant/applicant leave for enlargement of time within which to file list of witnesses, and documents to be relied on at the trial out of time.
2. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court deeming as properly filed and served the defendant/appellant list of witnesses, statement on oath of witnesses and documents to be relied on are hereby attached and

marked as EXHIBIT A, B1 to B4, C1 to C8 respectively.

3. And for such order or further order as this Honourable Court may deem it fit to make in the circumstance of this application.

See pages 85 ? 111 of record of Appeal. The Counter-affidavit in opposition to this application is at pages 160 ? 162 of the record. The application was argued on the 24th October, 2013. In the Ruling delivered on the 7th November, 2013, the trial Court, in dismissing the application held at page 174 of the record thus: