The 1st Appellant is a Commercial Bank with Headquarters at No. 2 Zaria Road Kano. It has branches all over the country, including one at Muritala Mohammed Way, Ilorin. The Respondent is lawyer. He is an external Solicitor for the 1st Appellant at all material time. He also operates a current account with the 1st Appellant.

Sometime in 1975, the 1st Appellant granted a loan of N10,000 to the Respondent. In order to secure the loan, the Respondent mortgaged his properties situate and lying at No.26, Sulu Gambari Road, Ilorin. The Respondent in his capacity as the external solicitor for the 1st Appellant prepared the mortgage deed. He also obtained the Governor's consent covering the mortgage transaction as is required by the Land Use Act. 1978.

Later, the Respondent obtained another loan of N50,000 also, from the 1st Appellant. According to the Respondent, it was an unsecured friendly loan. He was however instructed by the 1st Appellant, after the loan was obtained to upstamp the earlier mortgage to N55,000 by another deed.

He complied with the instruction. The Respondent emphasised that the Governor's consent was not obtained after the upstamping. When the Respondent defaulted in repaying the second loan, the 1st Appellant instructed the 2nd Appellant, a licensed auctioneer to issue auction notices in the Newspapers and Television, advertising the sale. The Respondent instituted a suit against the Appellants. It is the Respondent's case that having the 1st loan of N10,000 on which a mortgage was secured, the title deed of the property should have been returned to him. He contended that the second loan of N50,000 was unsecured as the upstamped mortgage deed covering it does not contain the Governor's consent as is required b law. The Respondent observed that at the time the 1st Appellant advertised and published the auction notice at public places, including the print and electronic media, the 1st Appellant was owing him over N150,000 by way of professional fees. He however admitted that he defaulted in repaying the second loan N50.000.

The 1st Appellant on the other hand denied owing the Respondent legal fees. It however admitted this it has not paid for services of the Respondent in respect of: