Judgment
FREDERICK OZIAKPONO OHO, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): This appeal is against the final decision of the High Court of Justice, Anambra State sitting at Onitsha Judicial Division (hereinafter referred to as: “the Court below”) Coram: P. C. OBIORA, J. in Suit No: O/390/2004 delivered on the 26th day of February, 2014 wherein the Respondent sued the Appellant for recovery of debt, storage fee and interest on judgment sum. The learned trial Court after considering the evidence of both parties granted the Respondent’s reliefs.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION: The Appellant has formulated three (3) issues for determination of this appeal. Thus: 1. Whether the learned trial Court was right when he granted Relief 16(1) & (2) of the Statement of Claim of the Respondent where there are no facts in the Respondent’s pleadings nor was there any evidence adduced in support or proved of that relief. See grounds 3 and 4 of the Appellant’s Notice and Ground of Appeal. 2.
Whether the learned trial Court was right when he held that the Appellant is the only necessary party before him in the determination of the dispute that arose in the transaction leading to this suit at the Court below. See ground 2 of the Appellant’s Notice and Grounds of Appeal. 3. Whether the action instituted by the Respondent at the Court below is competent wherein the Respondent sued a non-legal person ‘Emeka Madona’ instead of Emeka Ikueze or Remss Global Ltd. See ground 1 of the Appellant’s Notice and Grounds of Appeal.
The Respondent formulated four (4) issues by adopting issues Numbers 1 and 3, as formulated by the Appellant with modifications as issues Numbers 1 and 4 respectively and thereafter formulated fresh issues as issues Numbers 2 and 3, thus: 1. Whether the learned trial Judge was right when he granted Reliefs 16(1) and (2) of the Amended statement of claim in favour of the Respondent? 2. Whether EMEKA MADONA is a business name or natural person who has capacity to sue and be sued in that name? 3. Whether REMS GLOBAL CO. a non-juristic person has legal capacity to transact business in Nigeria? 4.
Whether the action instituted by the Respondent at the Court below is competent wherein the Respondent sued EMEKA MADONA, instead of EMEKA IKUEZE or Rems Global Co. or REMESS GLOBAL LTD? A careful perusal of the issues nominated by the parties across board is clearly identical except for minor issues of semantics. This appeal shall therefore be determined based on the issues nominated by the Appellant. Learned Counsel addressed this Court extensively, citing plethora of decided cases in support of their submissions.
