Keystone Bank Plc V. Kassim Yiggon (2013)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JIMI OLUKAYODE BADA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal emanated from the Judgment of the Adamawa State High Court, Yola in SUIT NO. ADSY/5/04: KASSIM YIGGON VS. HABIB NIG. BANK LTD. (NOW KEYSTONE BANK PLC), delivered on the 8th day of June, 2005 wherein the trial Judge found in favour of the Respondent.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the Respondent i.e the Plaintiff at the lower Court, by a Writ of Summons dated 30/1/2004, claimed the following reliefs against the Appellant i.e the Defendant at the lower Court.

“1. A declaration that the purported dismissal of the plaintiff as a staff of the Defendant Bank vide letter of 2nd October, 2003 in all circumstance of the case is unlawful, invalid, illegal, wrongful and void.

2. The sum of (N749.882,51) Seven Hundred and Forty Nine Thousand Eight Hundred and Eighty Two Naira Fifty One Kobo only, being the Plaintiff’s balance of staff provident Scheme (SPF) as at October, 2003.
3. The sum of (N99.950.76) Ninety-Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred and Fifty Naira, Seventy Six Kobo only, being the outstanding salary while on suspension.
4. The sum of N328.734.11 being outstanding annual leave days pay.

IN THE ALTERNATIVE

5. The Plaintiff claims the sum of N5,000.000.00 Five Million as general damages for wrongful dismissal.
6. Any further or better Orders.”

Pleadings were duly ordered and exchanged and both sides called witnesses. At the conclusion of hearing, the learned trial Judge found in favour of the Respondent.

The Appellant who is dissatisfied with the Judgment of the lower Court now appealed to this Court.

The learned Counsel for the Appellant formulated two issues for the determination of the appeal.

The issues are set out as follows:-

“1. Whether the dismissal of the Plaintiff/Respondent from the service of the Defendant/Appellant is not justifiable in view of the evidence adduced before the trial Court (Distilled from Grounds 1, 2, 3 & 4).

2. Whether it was proper for the trial Court to award to the Plaintiff/respondent the reliefs that were awarded in this matter” (Distilled from Grounds 5 & 6).

The learned Counsel for the Respondent formulated a lone issue for determination of the appeal.

The issue is set out as follows:-

“Whether the Plaintiff/Respondent based on preponderance of evidence has proved his case to warrant the trial Court to enter Judgment in his favour and grant the reliefs enumerated in the said Judgment”. (Distilled from Grounds 1 to 6).

At the hearing of the Appeal, the learned Counsel for the Appellant referred to the Appellant’s further amended brief of argument which was filed on 14/11/2013. He adopted the said brief as his argument in urging that the appeal be allowed.