Mrs. Miriam Dilli V. Alhaji Muhammed Salisu Adamu & Anor (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH EYO EKANEM, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This appeal is against the judgment of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (‘the trial Court’ for short)- in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/1442/07 delivered on the 15th day of May, 2008. In the judgment, the trial Court found for the 1st respondent (as plaintiff) and entered judgment in his favour in terms of the lst set of reliefs claimed by the 1st respondent.

It is pertinent to state some of the facts of the case leading to this appeal. It is common ground between the parties that the 1st respondent was the owner of the property lying and being at Plot 8, 341 Road, A – Close, Gwarimpa 11 Estate, Abuja. The lst respondent agreed with the original appellant (Ari Modu) for a purchase of the property at the agreed sum of N18,000,000:00 (Eighteen Million Naira).

An initial deposit of $10,000,00 (Ten Thousand Dollars) was paid by the original appellant in early May, 2006, pursuant to the agreement. The original appellant later paid a total of N10,000,000:00 (Ten Million Naira) in two instalments leaving a balance of N6,700,000:00 (Six Million, Seven Hundred Thousand

Naira) to be paid.

As averred in the 1st respondents statement of claim, when the original appellant failed to pay the balance inspite of his demands and his (appellant’s) promises, the 1st respondent assigned the property to the 2nd respondent who paid him the sum of N18,000,000:00 (Eighteen Million Naira) as full and final payment for the property. The original appellant rejected a refund of the money paid by him to the 1st respondent and insisted on paying the balance. The 2nd respondent also refused an offer of a refund of the purchase price and insisted on having the property.

Consequent upon the above, the 1st respondent took out an Originating Summons against the original appellant and 2nd respondent for the determination of certain questions and reliefs pertaining to the property and the transactions with them relating to the property.

The trial Court found that the suit was not properly commenced by Originating Summons and therefore ordered the parties to the pleadings, which order was complied with. In the statement of claim of the 1st

respondent, the 1st respondent claimed as follows:

“i) A DECLARATION that there was no valid

agreement of sale between the plaintiff and the 1st Defendant in respect of Plot 8, 341 Road, A-Close, Gwarimpa 11 Estate Abuja, the subject matter of this suit or that any agreement between plaintiff and 1st Defendant has been terminated due to failure of 1st Defendant to meet up with conditions of the contract.

ii. A DECLARATION that the contract agreement between the plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant is valid and subsisting.

iii. A DECLARATION that the 1st Defendant is in unlawful possession of the subject matter of this suit having forcefully gained entry without the permission of the plaintiff.

iv. A DECLARATION that all the improvements effected on the subject matter by the 1st defendant were unlawfully done at his peril having been done without the consent of the plaintiff.