HARRY AKANDE V. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY & ORS
August 7, 2025ANDREW EBOHIMI OMOIJUANFO V. NIGERIAN TECHNICAL COMPANY LTD
August 7, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1976) Legalpedia (SC) 90572
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Thu Apr 15, 1976
Suit Number: SC. 322/1975
CORAM
SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
FATAYI-WILLAIMS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
MADARIKAN, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHIEF AJAH OJAH (for themselves and as representing the Community of Etono 2, Akamkpa Division) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Plaintiffs claimed against the defendants, jointly and severally, a declaration that the plaintiffs are lessors of about three-fifths of the Biakpan Rubber Estate land, and an order directing the defendants to pay over to the plaintiffs a certain amount being part of the amount paid by the 7th defendant as rent for the aforesaid rubber estate, to the 6th defendant to pay over to the plaintiffs community and the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th defendants which amount was actually collected by the 4th defendant, who refused or neglected despite repeated demands to pay over to the plaintiffs the latters own aforesaid share or anything. The learned Judge refused both arms of the plaintiffs application. Not satisfied with this ruling, the plaintiffs appealed to the court of appeal and further to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The appeal succeeded. It was allowed.
ISSUES
1. Against the refusal of the lower court to grant the order sought in the first arm of the motion
2. Against the refusal to grant the order sought in the second arm of the motion.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DUTY OF COURT IN EXERISE OF POWER
“In exercise of the powers thus conferred, the court must have more regard to substance; and, as a general rule, an amendment under Order XXXIV will be granted if it is “for the purpose of determining in the existing suit the real questions or question in controversy between the parties”.” Per MADARIKAN, JSC.
CASES CITED
Tildesley v. Harper (1878) 10 Ch.D.393 at p.396
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None
