Mrs Eno Umo V. Mrs Cecilia Udonwa (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

UZO I. NDUKWE-ANYANWU, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the High Court No. 3 Calabar Cross River State delivered on 26th July, 2007. Briefly the facts of this case are as follows: The Respondent as plaintiff brought this suit under the Undefended List Procedure vide order of 7th June, 2007. The Appellant as defendant was served this writ on 14th June, 2007. The respondent as Plaintiff claimed as follows:

1. The sum of Two Hundred and Twenty Seven thousand Five Hundred Naira (N227,500.00) only the balance of her indebtedness to the Plaintiff.

2. The sum of One Hundred Thousand Naira (N100,000.00) only being the cost of litigation.

3. 25% interest on the said amount until the liquidation of the judgment debt”.

On the return date, the defendant/appellant did not file a notice of intention to defend this suit. The trial Judge went ahead and delivered his considered judgment. In it the trial Judge held as follows:

‘In the result, judgment is entered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant in the sum of N227,500 with N50,000.00 cost of litigation, with interest at the rate of 21% till the judgment debt is liquidated.

The Appellant being dissatisfied filed his notice and 3 grounds of appeal. The Appellant also filed his brief of argument on 8th April, 2008 and in it articulates 3 issues for determination as follows:-

1. Whether the trial Judge was right in awarding to the Respondent 21% post judgment interest.

2. Whether the learned trial Judge in awarding cost had exercised a proper judicial discretion.

3. Whether the claim of the Respondent was not speculative.

The Respondent in this appeal did not file any brief. O 18 R4 (1) of the court Appeal Rule 2011 provides as follows:

“The Respondent shall also within thirty days of the service of the brief for the Appellant on him file the Respondent’s brief which shall be duly endorsed with an address for service”.

It would be taken that the Respondent does not want to file any Respondent’s brief. This appeal therefore would be heard on the Appellant’s brief alone.