CORAM

PARTIES

1. MASSKEN NIGERIA LIMITED2. MRS ALEX ONONYE3. SURVEYOR ALEX ONONYE  APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

Not Available

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Respondents instituted an action before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja under the undefended list procedure in which the Respondents claimed against the Appellants jointly and severally the sum of Three Million Six Hundred And Fifty-Five Thousand naira plus 21% interest from January 2002 to date of judgment and thereafter same rate until judgment sum is finally liquidated. The Respondents filed an affidavit in which it was deposed that the amount of indebtedness arose from an outstanding friendly loan of Three Million naira and various other sums of money collected by the Defendants/Appellants. Exhibited to the affidavit in support are; a cheque for a sum of N 3,000,000 and a letter of demand respectively. Upon service of the processes on the Appellants, they filed a notice of intention to defend the suit. The court in its ruling held that the Appellants had not disclosed sufficient defence on the merit to convince the court to transfer the suit for hearing under the General Cause List. The court relied on exhibit ‘A’, the cheque, as evidence of the transaction between the parties in giving judgment in favour of the Respondents. The claim for interest was however refused by the court. The Appellants were dissatisfied with the said judgment and consequently appealed to the lower court which appeal was dismissed. Still not satisfied, the Appellants have further lodged the instant appeal before this court.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed.

ISSUES

?    Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right by delving into proof at this stage and stated that there was no satisfactory explanation as to why 3rd appellant issued the cheque exhibit “A” and wrongly acceded by not transferring the suit to the General Cause List and affirmed the judgment of the trial court??    Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right by holding that the learned trial Judge exercised her discretion judiciously and judicially by failing to transfer the suit to the General Cause List when there was no basis for the exercise of that discretion??    Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right in holding that the averments in paragraphs 3(c), (d), (e), 4, 5 and 8 of the affidavit of Abubakar Mohammed in support of the Undefended List are not hearsay evidence and competent and dismissed the appeal??    Whether the learned justices of the Court of Appeal were right in holding that the reply brief properly filed by the appellants is superfluous in this case and failed to consider it?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Companies and Allied Matters Act, 1990High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (Civil Procedure) Rules 1989

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT