Societe Generale Bank (Nigeria) Limited & Anor V. Integrated Farm Industry Limited (1999)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ONALAJA, J.C.A.

The Plaintiff now Respondent in this ruling issued a writ of summons in Ile-Ife Judicial Division now Osun State High Court sometimes in June, 1988 against the Defendants now Applicants in this ruling with the writ endorsed for declaratory reliefs, damages for trespass to land, goods and conversion.

After service on defendants/Applicants pleadings were filed, delivered and exchanged but the case suffered vicissitude of being lost and found due to the imbroglio between Ife and Modakeke which also resulted in the vandalisation of Ile-Ife High Court. After much efforts Respondent retrieved the file and resuscitated same in High Court Registry with relisting of the case which was struck out by the Court. In granting the application to relist on 2nd December, 1996 by the Respondent the application was granted without objection of the Applicants.

After relisting the case Respondent brought an application to amend the statement of claim with a date fixed for hearing of the motion. Before the hearing date Applicants brought an application under Order 25 Rule 20 Oyo State High Court Civil Procedure Rules applicable in Osun State for an order dismissing the action for want of diligent prosecution or alternatively striking out the statement of claim. The grounds were that since the commencement of the action there had been incessant delays by the Respondent. That further trial would amount to denial of justice and fair hearing to Applicants.

Upon the motion for amendment of the statement of claim coming up for argument, applicants pressed the court to take the motion for dismissal of the action before the motion for amendment of the statement of claim. The lower court acceded to the request of applicants and heard arguments preferred by Applicants and reply by Respondent, this argument was made on 22nd July, 1997.

After arguments the learned Judge there and then delivered his ruling which for better understanding is hereby set down below as at page 55 of the record of appeal thus:-

“RULING

I have considered the entire application. It is not in doubt that when the case was relisted on 2/12/96 by my learned brother, the Respondents had an application to amend the statement of claim which was pending. Between the period of relisting and the hearing of the Respondents’ motion to amend their claim, the Applicants brought a motion to dismiss or strike out the case for want or diligent prosecution. There is no doubt that strenuous efforts were made to ensure that the case goes to trial by the Respondents when it was discovered that the case file was missing.

I have considered the submissions and authorities cited by Counsel for the parties. I have a discretion whether or not to grant the application, the overriding consideration being the justice of the case.

By and large, I am of the firm view that Applicants’ application lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.

Sgd. F. O. OGUNSOLA

Judge 22/7/97”

Against the above ruling Applicants filed notice of appeal and brought application under Section 221 of 1979 Constitution and Order 46 Rule 1 of the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules for leave to appeal against the interlocutory decision of 22/7/97 in so far as the appeal involves facts or mixed law and facts and for stay of further proceedings.

In a considered ruling at pages 64 and 65 of the Record of Appeal on 29th July, 1997 the lower court refused leave that the proposed grounds of appeal did not disclose substantial issues of law. Against the said ruling applicants filed notice of appeal at pages 66 to 69 of the record of appeal.