Joseph Nnamani & Ors V. Comfort Inyang Ikoku & Anor (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM, J.C.A. 

 On 3-7-2012 by a writ of summons accompanied by a statement of claim, witness depositions, list of witnesses, photocopies of documents and list of documents, the respondents herein, as plaintiffs, commenced suit No. E/230/2012 in the High Court of Enugu State sitting at Enugu against the appellants herein as defendants.

The defendants on 28-11-2012 filed their statement of defence accompanied by a list of witnesses, witness depositions, list of documents to be relied on and photocopies of documents.

?The plaintiffs had on 3-7-2012 while commencing Suit No. E/230/2012, filed along with the writ of summons, a motion on notice praying for-
?(A) ?An order of interlocutory injunction restraining the respondents, their agents/privies or any persons claiming through them from trespassing or further trespassing whether by entry, placing of objections, excavation of soil or in any manner whatsoever disturbing/inhibiting the plaintiff?s/applicants in the enjoyment of their ownership/possessory rights in respect of the property i.e. to say the

1

?Asha? land, measuring 28.03 acres and situate at Mary Land, Awkunanaw Enugu, delineated clearly in plan No. ENC/70/71 bounded by beacon Nos. EK1780, EK17802, EK17803, EK17804, EK1716, EK1715, EK1716, EK1714, EK18013 E99737, EK17810, EK18166, EJ73008, EK18167 and EK18168 registered as No. 29, at page 29, Vol. 514, Lands Registry Enugu pending the determination of the substantive suit.?

The said motion on notice was supported by an affidavit of 14 paragraphs and a written argument of the motion. Exhibited with the said affidavit are photocopies of a deed of lease, letters of administration, High Court notice and police report.

The 2nd defendant filed a counter affidavit of 44 paragraphs with a written address in opposition of the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction. Exhibited with the counter affidavit are photocopies of lease agreements, perimeter survey plan, land in dispute survey plan, East Central State official Gazette No 13 of 22-3-1973, contingency fee agreement and caveat emptor.
The plaintiffs filed a further affidavit of 12 paragraphs to which is attached and exhibited several documents.

?On 29-11-2012,

2

the plaintiffs moved and argued their motion on notice praying for interlocutory injunction. The defendants immediately responded to same and adopted their written address opposing the grant of interlocutory injunction.

The trial Court, immediately rendered its ruling extempore, after the respondents argument. The five lines ruling reads thusly-
I have gone through the motion papers. I have also listened to Bar. I. Aroh Esq. of learned Counsel for Applicant and C.P. Ugwu Esq. From the submissions of the learned counsel on both sides, there appears to arise a confusion that needs to be cleared during hearing of the main suit. I therefore hereby grant the motion of the applicant as prayed.?

Dissatisfied with this ruling, the defendants on 11-12-2012 commenced this appeal No. CA/E/8/2012 by filing a notice of appeal containing 3 grounds for the appeal.

Both sides have filed, exchanged and adopted their briefs, namely, appellant?s brief, respondent?s brief and appellants reply brief.