Union Bank Nigeria Plc. V. Innocent N. Nwanajuo (2012)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

The Respondent as Plaintiff had filed an action in suit No. H3/4/96 at the High Court of Cross River State, sitting at Ogoja, against the Appellant as Defendant in which he claimed the following reliefs:-

1. A declaration that all such debts, withdrawals and tampering with the plaintiff’s account be declared null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

2. An order directing or mandating the Defendant to credit all such money debited into the Plaintiff’s account with interest at the current rate.

3. An order directing the Defendant to return or deliver to the Plaintiff the original copies of the certificate of occupancy numbers OG/256./85 and EN/43/83 in respect of his properties situate at Okuku – Yala and Abakaliki respectively which has been held by the Defendant who surprisingly has refused, neglected or failed to return same despite repeated demands.

4. An order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant, himself, agents, privies, servants, assigns or whosoever acting for and on behalf of the defendant from further debiting, withdrawing or tampering with plaintiff’s account.

5. The Plaintiff prays this Honourable court for an order and/or declaration that the purported sale of Plaintiff’s property situate at Okuku – Tala L.G.A. by the Defendant to one Chief Patrick Odachi Omeka was ultra vires the defendant and the same is null, void and of no effect at all. The Plaintiff claims special and general damages occasioned on him by the acts of trespass caused by the defendants and perpetrated by Chief Patrick Odachi Omeka, Defendant’s agent.

At the end of trial, the High Court, on the 5/8/2008, entered judgment in favour of the Respondent virtually granting the above claims against the Appellant. Being dissatisfied with the above decision, the Appellant filed notice of appeal on the 23/10/2008 containing five grounds of appeal.

With leave of the court, the record of the appeal received in the court on the 10/3/2009, was, deemed, on the 17/3/2009, the Appellant’s brief filed on the 14/1/2010, was deemed on the 4/2/2010 and the Respondent’s brief filed on the 7/12/2011, was deemed on the 1/2/2012. At the oral hearing of the appeal on the 21/2/2012, the briefs of argument were adopted as the submissions in support of the respective positions of the parties, by their learned counsel. We were urged by them to uphold the submissions and as the case may be, allow or dismiss the appeal accordingly.

The learned Counsel who settled the Appellant’s brief had distilled the following issues tor determination in the appeal at page 3 of the Appellant’s brief:

1. Whether the Respondent in the circumstances proved his case to be entitled to judgment in this case.

2. Whether failure, of the learned trial judge to order for the issuance and service of hearing notice on the defendant’s counsel in this matter as regards the proceedings of 14/7/08 and 15/7/08 amounts to denial of fair hearing and operates to rob the court of its jurisdiction to entertain the matter on those dates.

3. Whether default or, negligence of Counsel can be visited on a party.

It is clear that the learned counsel did not indicate the grounds of the appeal from which he formulated the above issues to enable the court to easily identify their foundation.