CORAM

DALHATU ADAMU, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA

YARGATA BYENCHIT NIMPAR

PARTIES

1. FRONTLINE HOLDINGS LIMITED                     2. CHIEF (MRS.) YEWANDE I. FALEYE    APPELLANTS

1. WEMA BANK PLC                        2. MR. KAYODE FILANI3. CHIEF E. IKEOKWU  4. CHIEF HELEN AMUNU ONUBIKO                           RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

This  proceedings originated from the sale by public auction of the property of the 2nd Appellant’s husband (now deceased), situate at Satellite Town, Lagos mortgaged to the 1st  Respondent in order to secure loan facilities granted to the 1st Appellant, a company in which the deceased and the 2nd Appellant had interest. The 1st Appellant, having defaulted in the repayment of the loan, the 1st Respondent called in the mortgage and the subject property was sold to the 4th Respondent through an auction that was conducted by the 3rd Respondent a licensed auctioneer. Dissatisfied with the conduct of the auction sale, the Appellants instituted proceedings at the High Court of Lagos State, claiming declaratory and injunctive reliefs, including special and general damages. The action was initially against the 1st and 2nd Respondents only. Subsequently, the 3rd and 4th Respondents were joined as parties to the action. The 1st Respondent filed a counterclaim against the Appellants, for the balance due on the account of the proceeds from the auction sale of the mortgaged property was not sufficient to offset the Appellants’ indebtedness. The 4th Respondent equally counterclaimed for possession of the property which it bought at the auction sale and monetary damages for the continued use and occupation of the property by the Appellant. At the end of the trial the lower Court dismissed the Appellants case and granted the relief claimed by the 1st and 2nd Respondents. The Appellants further dissatisfied with the judgment appeal to the Court of Appeal while the 1st and 4th Respondents cross appealed complaining of what they perceived as want of specificity in the trial court’s judgement.

HELD

Appeal Allowed, Cross Appeal Dismissed

ISSUES

?    Whether the learned trial judge ought to have set aside the sale of House 10 Close 3 by Auction as a result of noncompliance with Auction Law of Lagos State Cap 173 of Lagos State?    Whether there was evidence of collusion, fraud and bad faith before the lower Court such as to vitiate the sale of Plot 10 Close 3 Satellite Town, Off Badagry Road, Lagos State.?    Whether the 4th Respondent was entitled to possessionCROSS APPEAL?    Whether the trial judge was not     bound to make a definite pronouncement in respect of the 1st    Respondent/Cross Appellant’s counter-claim in the sum of N229,749.29 as 31/10/2000 and interest at the rate of 21% per annum thereon until the debt is finally liquidated having found in her judgment that the said counter claim was proved.?    Whether the trial judge was also not bound to have made a definite pronouncement in respect of the 4th Respondent/Cross Appellant’s counter-claim for immediate possession of the property, the subject matter of the suit, situate at Plot 10, Close 3, Satellite Town, Lagos.?    Whether the trial judge was right to have substituted her calculation of annual rental value for the annual rental value given in evidence for the use and occupation of the subject matter of the suit, having regard to the unchallenged and or uncontroverted evidence led by the Counter Claimants/Cross Appellants.”

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Auction Law Cap. 173 Laws of Lagos State 1994.Conveyancing Act, 1881 Sales by Auction Law of Lagos State 1994

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT