Rev. P. K. Agunbiade & Anor V. Mrs. Ogidan & Ors (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED AMBI-USI?DANJUMA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

By a judgment delivered on 26th day of January, 2011, the High Court of Ondo State per Hon. Justice A. O. Odusola sitting at the Akure Judicial Division, granted a declaration that the Appellants had made out a case of their breach of fundamental human right relating to the detention of property to wit a pavilion tent worth N4, 000,000.00 (Four Million Naira) which was being used for commercial or rental purposes and a subject of a contract of purchase from the 1st Respondent.

From the record of appeal, it is clear that part payment in substantial contract price had been made.

? The dispute was on whether or not the said pavilion had been handed over to the 1st Appellant by the 1st Respondent before the full payment which had been shown to have been made in installments or that the pavilion was taken by an act of forgery, constituting theft.

The appellants had claimed that the pavilion tent was forcefully retrieved and or detained by the 2nd – 4th Respondents who further forced part payment of the purchase price and had the 2nd Appellant’s liberty curtailed by

detention, on the pre of acting pursuant to a petition alleging forgery and theft of the pavilion as lodged by the 1st Respondent: who denied instructing the detention.

The 1st Respondent, however, had made a report of forgery and theft to the police.

From the case, the facts of which has been succinctly shown above, the Appellants filed an application for the enforcement of their fundamental rights, claiming as it were, declaratory remedies and injunction together with consequential damages in compensation and injunction.

Only a declaration for the wrongful detention of property was made but without consequential damages ordered. Injunction was however, ordered.

The Appellants lodged this appeal upon 4 grounds as contained at pages 59 – 62 of the record of appeal.

Appellants’ Brief of Argument dated 6th January, 2012 was field on 6 – 11 – 2013, while the 1st Respondents Brief dated 11 – 11 – 2014 and filed 13 – 11 – 2014. It was regularized by leave of Court and deemed filed 17 – 2 – 2015.

In like manner the 2nd Respondents’ Brief of Argument dated and filed 11 – 2-2015 was regularized by motion grated on 17 – 2 – 2015.

The appellants formulated the following issues for determination:

1. Whether on the material evidence placed before the learned trial judge by the Applicants (Appellants), the learned trial judge exercised his discretion judicially and judiciously in refusing to award exemplary damages against the respondents particularly after the learned trial judge had found as a fact that the Appellants’ pavilion tent was wrongfully detained by the respondents
2. Whether the trial judge was right in holding that the fundamental right of the 2nd Applicant was not breached and consequently refused to award any exemplary damages, having found that the petition leading the arrest and detention of the 2nd Applicant was false.
3. Whether the trial judge was right in holding that the arrest and detention of the 2nd Applicant by the police was right when the 1st Respondents petition, (Exhibit ‘A’) instigating the arrest was not written against the 2nd Applicant.

On the first issue, it was argued that the reliefs in paragraph ‘A’ of the Appellants/Applicants for One Hundred Million Naira Only N100, 000. 000.00) as exemplary damages against the