University of Agriculture Makurdi & Ors V. Onaja David Ogwuche & Ors (2000)
LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report
CHUKWUMA-ENEH, J.C.A.
P
ursuant to the interim order granted by this court on 8/12/99 upon an ex parte application brought by the Applicants seeking to stay further proceedings and the judgment of the Court below in the Suit No. MHC/394m/98 then pending at the Makurdi High Court (hereinafter referred to as the “Court below”) the substantive application on notice was adjourned to 10/21/2000 for hearing.
This Court on 8/12/99 upon a motion ex parte supported by an affidavit sworn to by E.C.N. Hundu, Esq., made the following orders in this matter thus:
“(a) That interim order staying proceedings of the substantive matter at the Court below until the motion on notice is heard and determined by this Honourable Court is hereby granted.
(b) That an interlocutory order to stay any judgment delivered by the trial Court and execution of same pending the hearing and determination of appeal on the ruling of the trial Court dated 18/10/99 is hereby granted.
(c) That the substantive application on notice is hereby adjourned to 10/2/2000 as already scheduled.”
The substantive motion on notice was filed on the same date – 23/11/99 as the motion ex parte. On 17/1/2000, the applicant filed yet another motion on notice to effect an amendment to the motion on 23/11/99 by inserting therein a second prayer as was contained in the motion ex parte but inadvertently left out. The motion of 17/1/2000 – a non contentious motion – not being opposed by Mr. Okutepa of Counsel, it was granted as prayed and thus the motion of 23/11/99 was amended to encompass as the second relief in the following terms:
“An interlocutory order to stay any judgment that may be delivered by the trial Court and execution of same pending the hearing/determination of the appeal on the ruling of the trial Court dated 18/10/99.”
At the hearing of the substantive motion of 23/11/99 on 10/2/2000, Mr. Osuman of Counsel for the Applicants conceded that the first prayer in the motion has been overtaken by events. For what it is worth the abandoned prayer is set forth thus:
“An order to stay proceedings of the substantive matter pending the determination of the appeal against the ruling of the Honourable Court below dated 18/10/99.”
Having served on the Respondents’ Counsel the order of this Court of 8/12/99, a chain of reactions was set in motion. The Respondents on 13/12/99 filed a motion on notice in which they prayed for two reliefs as follows:
“(i) An order vacating the orders of this Honourable Court given ex parte on 8th day of December, 1999, in application No. CA/J/272m/99.
(ii) An order of interim injunction restraining the Respondents and their agents herein from refusing the Applicants herein entry to the University of Agriculture Makurdi pending the motion of the respondents herein fixed for 10/2/2000.”.
Leave a Reply