Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ishola V. UBN (2005) CLR 2(f) (SC)

Judgement delivered on February 18th 2005

Brief

  • Evaluation of facts
  • Pleadings
  • Proof in civil cases
  • Reliefs not sought by parties
  • Interpretation of instruments

Facts

The action giving rise to this appeal arose as a result of a banker customer relationship between the parties. The Appellant who was the managing director of a business in the name of Salawal Motor House, maintained a business account with the Respondent at its branch in Ilorin, Kwara State. For the purpose of the smooth running of his business the Appellant secured an overdraft facility of N250,000.00 (Two Hundred and Fifty thousand Naira) from the Respondent in 1982. Subsequent to the grant of the said facility, the Appellant provided by way of security for the loan a legal mortgage on his landed property, a 5 storey building, in Ilorin. The facility was fully utilized by the Appellant but was unable to repay the amount as agreed by the parties. The Respondent thereafter resorted to realising the amount of the facility plus the accrued interest on the mortgaged property and the Appellant contested the move and instituted this action in the trial Court in 1988.

In the trial Court, the parties filed and exchanged their respective pleadings.

At the trial, the Appellant testified on his own behalf and called one witness in support of his case. The Respondent called two witnesses who are officials of the Respondent's bank in Ilorin in its defence. At the end of the trial, learned counsel for the parties filed their respective written addresses and thereafter the case was adjourned for judgment. On the 14th of April 1994, the learned trial Judge, Gbadeyan J, delivered a considered judgment in which he granted all the alternative prayers of the Appellant and found the Respondent liable to pay to the Appellant the sum of N594,417.17 with costs of N3,500.00

The Respondent was dissatisfied with this decision and it appealed to the Court of Appeal, which after hearing the appeal, decided to allow it. Consequently, it set aside the judgment of the trial Court including the order of costs and dismissed the Appellant's case in the trial Court. The Appellant now appeals against that decision to this Court.

Issues

  • 1.
    Whether the Court below was right to have relied on the decision of this...
    Read More