CaseLaw
Ozims V. Anoruo (1991) CLR 1(d) (CA)
Judgement delivered on January 18th, 1991
Brief
Facts
The plaintiff claimed against the defendant the sum of N5,000.00 being money had and received by the defendant on a consideration that has wholly failed. The case for the plaintiff was that the defendant sold the land in dispute to him for N5,000.00 and a Deed of Conveyance admitted at the trial as Exhibit B, was subsequently executed by the defendant in his favour and he took possession of the land. He said when he was carrying out a survey of the land, some people came and chased his workers away. It was however after the completion of the survey that Exhibit B was executed in his favour by the defendant. He further stated that he received a letter admitted at the trial as Exhibit C, from the defendant’s family warning him the plaintiff not to enter the land which they claim did not belong to the defendant. The defendant admitted executing the Deed of Conveyance but denied receiving N5,000.00. The learned trial Judge found as a fact that the defendant received the sum of N5,000.00 but after considering the evidence on both sides, he relied on the decision in Abudu Bada v. The premier Thrift Society 13 NLR 47 and dismissed the plaintiff’s claim. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal and contended inter alia, that having agreed at the close of the case that the issue before the trial court was principally one of fact and that the facts should be left to the court without counsel’s addresses, the trial Judge erred in law by dismissing the plaintiff’s case on a point of law contained in the decision in Abudu Bada’s case without inviting counsel to address the court on the point. It was also contended that since it was established that the respondent received the sum of N5,000.00 for the sale of the land, the trial Judge should have considered the possibility of making an order of non-suit.
Issues
If as the lower court so found there was a valid conveyance of a particular land...