Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

I.M.B. (Nig) Ltd V. Dabiri (1998) CLR 1(J) (CA)

Brief

  • Admissibility of photocopy of certified true copy of a public document
  • Affidavit evidence
  • Consent order
  • Interpleader summons
  • Distinction between admissibility of evidence and weight to be attached thereto

Facts

Section 27 Sheriffs and Civil Process Law Cap. 127 Laws of Lagos State provides as follows:

  • "27
    (1) If a claim is made to or in respect of any property attached in execution under process of a court or in respect of the proceeds or value therefore, the Registrar may upon the application of the sheriff, summons calling before the court the party at whose instance the process issued and the party making the claim.
  • (2)
    Upon the issue of the summons any action brought in any court in respect of the claim or of any damage arising out of the execution of the writ shall be stayed.
  • (3)
    On the hearing of the summons the court shall adjudicate upon the claim, and the sheriff upon any claim to damages arising or capable of arising out of the execution of the writ by the sheriff, and shall make such order in respect of any such claim and the costs of the proceedings as it thinks fit".

In compliance with the above provisions of section 27, the Deputy Sheriff of Lagos State High Court henceforth referred to in this judgment in the instant appeal as the 3rd respondent issued through the Registrar of the High court of Lagos State an inter pleader summons for the claimant now referred to in the instant appeal as the appellant to justify its claims to two buses namely a Toyota Coaster Bus registered as No. LA 1118 AS and Peugeot J5 with registration as No. LA 833 SM which were executed upon in the premises of the defendant in the lower court following the judgment sum of N123,000.00 entered against the defendant on 26th day of July 1990. The defendant is hereinafter referred to in this judgment as the 2nd respondent. The said judgment was in favour of the plaintiff now referred to as the 1st respondent against the 2nd respondent in this appeal.

As stated above 3rd respondent filed an inter pleader summons for appellant to establish its claims to the two buses. Meanwhile the appellant filed a bond for the value of the motor vehicles, and attached the motor vehicles particulars and the grounds of the claims, with a verifying affidavit which included the leasing agreement of the two buses between appellants subsidiary company and the 2nd respondent.

The appellant sought by application to the court an interim order for the release of the buses to it having entered a bond pending the final determination of the Interpleader summons. With consent of all parties the interim application was suspended that in the interest of all, the court should proceed with hearing of the arguments of the interpleader summons by relying on the affidavits and documents attached to the application for interim release. As this was mutually agreed with the consent of all parties, the learned Judge granted the prayer, that the verifying affidavits and documents attached to the application for interim release. As this was mutually agreed with the consent of all parties, the learned Judge granted the prayer, that the verifying affidavits and documents marked as exhibits to the interim order of release be used in arguing the interpleader summons.

After arguments of the parties the learned Judge in his ruling concluded that the application for interpleader summons was refused as it lacked merit which led to the dismissal of the interpleader summons.

Dissatisfied with the decision of the lower court, an appeal was filed.

Issues

  • Whether the appellant discharged the burden of proof in an interpleader...
    Read More