Prophetess Oluwaniyi V. Chief Olufemi Adewumi & Ors (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

JOSEPH SHAGBAOR IKYEGH, J.C.A (Delivering the leading Judgment)

The appeal emanated from the ruling of the High court of Justice of Oyo State, in the Ibadan Judicial Division, in Suit No.1/694/2002, granting the 1st respondent an interim order of injunction against the appellant for alleged nuisance, pending the determination of the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction.

In the motion for interlocutory injunction before the court below, the 1st respondent prayed for:

“An order of interlocutory injunction restraining the defendant and all the members of Christ Mercy Church of Plot 29, G.R.A, Iyaganku, Ibadan by themselves, their agents, privies or whosoever from further engaging in activities such as clapping, shouting singing and drumming through loud speakers or in any other form or other activities that may constitute nuisance to the annoyance and inconvenience of the plaintiff in the premises of the property of the YMCA and in Plot 29 both in Block XII of New G.R.A. Iyaganku, Ibadan between the hours of 7.00pm. and a.m pending the final determination of this action.”

The above motion for interlocutory injunction was filed on 2.8.2002. From the compiled record of appeal, the court below first sat on 31.10,02. The application could not be heard on 31.10.02, on account of the absence of the appellant’s learned counsel. By agreement between counsel who held the brief of the appellant’s learned counsel, and respondents’ respective learned counsel all pending motions were adjourned to be heard on 9.12.02,

On 9.12.2002, the court sat. The appellant’s learned counsel and his client were absent. No explanation was given for their absence. The notice of preliminary objection of the appellant was struck out upon oral application by the 1st respondent’s learned counsel. The motion for interlocutory injunction was, however, adjourned for hearing on 13.12.02.

All the learned counsel was in court on 13.12.02. The 1st respondent’s learned counsel intimated the court below that he would move the pending motion for interlocutory injunction. The appellant’s learned counsel offered, instead, an undertaking covering the use of loud speakers by this client only. He was not prepared to extend the undertaking to the other items of the alleged nuisance.

The 1st respondent’s learned counsel then applied orally:

“That an interim order of injunction be made since the 1st defendant’s Applicant’s counsel is not prepared to give an undertaking.”

The compiled record of appeal does not indicate the reaction of the appellant’s learned counsel to the oral application. Counsel for the 2nd – 3rd defendants in the court below, Mr. I. O. Tijani, a legal officer, on his own part, urged that justice be done to the two sides.

The court below recounted the set-back encountered by the application for interlocutory injunction and ruled as follows:

“I am of the opinion that it will meet the cause of justice if, the 1st defendant is restrained in the interim from engaging in activities such as clapping, shouting, singing and drumming through loud speakers or in any other form or other activities that may constitute nuisance to the annoyance and inconvenience of the plaintiff in the premises of the property of the YMCA and in Plot 29 both in Block XII of New G.R.A, Iyaganku, Ibadan between the hours of 7.00a.m pending the hearing and determination of the application on Notice for Interlocutory Injunction which is hereby fixed by agreement of counsel to 10th of January, 2003 for argument. I hereby so order.”

It is against that ruling that the appellant filed a notice of appeal with two grounds of appeal.

The single issue for determination distilled by the appellant from the two grounds of appeal is: