.
hbriefs heading animation Search for cases summary on Hbriefs like hbriefs on facebook follow hbriefs on twitter

BOOK: First 2-Years as a Law Student: Experiences and Lessons - visit website

JUMP TO CONTENT

Richard Nwanaga Esonu v. Okechukwu Esonu & Ors (2017) - CA


place advert here


icon CASE SUMMARY OF:


Richard Nwanaga Esonu v. Okechukwu Esonu & Ors (2017) - CA


by PaulPipAr
icon TAG(S)


- Power of attorney;
icon PARTIES


APPELLANT
RICHARD NWANAGA ESONU


v.


RESPONDENTS
1. OKECHUKWU ESONU;
2. KENNETH UBANI;
3. BRIGHT UBANI;
4. DAVID EKPO
icon CITATION


(2017) LPELR-42295(CA);
icon COURT


Court of Appeal
icon LEAD JUDGEMENT DELIVERED BY:


Tunde Oyebanji Awotoye, J.C.A.
icon APPEARANCES


* FOR THE APPELLANT
- Laurel C. S. Kalunta;


* FOR THE RESPONDENT
- Daniel Anya;
The member(s) and administrator(s) of HCB put in energy in order to provide the cases summary they do on this online platform. We desist from charging you a fee, and we have decided to keep this online platform free and accessible for as long as we deem fit. However, in order to keep alive the impetus that makes us provide these free services, kindly make a donation, if you can.
Bank: Zenith Bank.
Name: Branham Paul Chima.
Account No.: 2178756839.


icon FACT (as relating to the issues)


This is the judgment in respect of the appeal lodged by the appellant against the judgment of Abia State High Court sitting at Umuahia in Suit No: HU/222/2009 delivered on 14th day of March, 2012. The appellant was the plaintiff at the lower Court. He instituted an action against the defendants claiming as per Paragraph 28 of his statement of claim thus: "Wherefore the plaintiff claims against the defendants are as follows:- 1) A declaration that the plaintiff is entitled to the statutory right of occupancy to the piece or parcel of land known as and called AMAEKPO land situate at Umuaguanya Umuoriehi Isingwu Umuahia in Umuahia North Local Government Area within the Jurisdiction of this Honourable Court at the survey plan filed with the statement of claim. 2) Perpetual Injunction restraining all the defendants, their agents, privies and workmen from entering into the land without the approval of the claimant. 3) The sum of N500,000 (FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND NAIRA) from the 2nd, 3rd and 4th defendants for general damages in that the 2nd and 3rd defendant entered the land and surveyed it without the consent of the clement.
Parties filed and exchanged pleadings.


The learned trial judge after hearing the parties gave judgment inter alia as follows:- "In all, I find more pieces of evidence in support of sale of land by Job Esonu to Smart Ubani then, (sic) against the sale. In the final analysis, the claimant has failed to prove his case since his father had sold the same land in the presence of his 1st Son - 1st defendant. This Suit is therefore explanatory and adventurous and ought to, and is hereby dismissed."


Miffed by the said decision, the appellant on 7/5/2012 filed Notice of Appeal challenging the decision.
icon ISSUE(S)


1. Whether the Judgment as held by the lower court meets the justice of the case to warrant the Court of Appeal to uphold same.
icon ARGUMENTS OF PARTIES


* FOR THE APPELLANT
*FOR THE RESPONDENT

icon HOLDING & RATIO DECIDENDI


[APPEAL: ALLOWED, COST N40,000 against the 2nd & 3rd respondent]


1. ISSUE 1 WAS RESOLVED IN FAVOUR OF THE APPELLANT BUT AGAINST THE RESPONDENT.


RULING:
i. The learned trial Judge after rejecting the Power of Attorney gathered together the photocopy of the cheque issued in the name of JOB ARUKWE ESONU, (which was not proved to have been cashed and given to him) and a letter allegedly written by the 1st Respondent (but denied by 1st Respondent and oral evidence of 4th defendant to prove the terms and contents of the Power of Attorney and the sale). Could all these have taken the place of the rejected power of attorney which defined the size of the land, the terms of the contract and allegedly bore the signature of the parties to the contract?. The answer is No. Such oral evidence could not and cannot be adduced without the evidence of sale of land transaction. The 2nd and 3rd defendant who asserted that there was sale of land did not prove their case.
ii. The meaning of this is that the original ownership of the land in dispute having been conceded by the 2nd and 3rd defendants as that of the father of the claimant and the claim of the claimant of having inherited the land from his mother not having been controverted successfully, the claimants claim at the lower Court should have succeeded.
icon REFERENCED



icon SOME PROVISIONS



icon RELEVANT CASES



Get that your business, idea, or work available to the public. HCB gets sufficient amount of visits daily. Utilise this golden opportunity to make your product(s) available to the public domain by advertising on this website. If you are interested in advertising on this platform, click "place my advert".

place my advert

place advert here
Go to Crowdfire


icon NOTABLE DICTA


* PROCEDURAL
The 1st Respondents brief contains essentially the same arguments with the appellants brief. This is wrong. It is the Respondents duty to support the judgment of the lower Court and not to attack it. The 1st Respondent not having filed a cross appeal or a Respondents' notice cannot be seen to attack the judgment which traditionally he should defend. - Awotoye, J.C.A. Richard v. Okechukwu (2017)


Now a rejected exhibit cannot be considered by a Court in its adjudication. It has no probative value. - Awotoye, J.C.A. Richard v. Okechukwu (2017)


Furthermore, once an agreement has been reduced into writing oral evidence will not be admitted to prove or vary or add to the term of the contract which is in writing. - Awotoye, J.C.A. Richard v. Okechukwu (2017)


* SUBSTANTIVE

The end of this brief.


If this brief was aidful to you, LIKE Hbriefs on Facebook and FOLLOW Hbriefs on Twitter to get frequent Legal updates from Hbriefs.
kind_emoji


place advert here




USE THE SEARCH BOX BELOW
If the search box is not available below, it is due to network issues; in that case, reload page or check back again.
The search feature works perfect! Although the search feature might not capture very recent uploaded cases; If you did not get a particular case, we recommend entering the Case Summary categories and use your browser search/find feature, or use the request feature below.


JUMP TO TOP


REQUEST A CASE SUMMARY





ABOUT



TERMS AND CONDITONS



ADVERTISE ON HBRIEFS



FOUNDER




Humongouz Empire
© 2018 - 2021

website developed by hzztudio