Judgment
JAMILU YAMMAMA TUKUR, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment) : This is an appeal against the ruling of the Federal High Court, Jalingo Division, Taraba State in FHC/JAL/CS/15/2018 delivered on 23rd March, 2020, by Honourable Justice S.D. Pam in favour of the 1st Respondent.
The material facts are that following its dissatisfaction with the decision of the lower Court delivered on 3rd July, 2019 entering judgment in favour of the 1st Respondent, the Appellant appealed the decision via a Notice of Appeal filed on 30th September, 2019, with the Registry of this Court receiving the record of appeal on 13th March, 2020. Subsequent to the filing of appeal but prior to the entering of same, the 1st Respondent filed garnishee proceedings on 30th January, 2020.
During the hearing for the order nisi to be made absolute on 23rd March 2020, it was Appellant’s contention that the lower Court had no jurisdiction to continue with the matter as an appeal on the case had been entered in this Court.
The lower Court went ahead with the proceedings and made an order absolute in favour of the 1st Respondent herein. Dissatisfied with the above decision of the lower Court, the Appellant appealed the ruling via Amended Notice of Appeal dated 9th November, 2020 and filed on 10th November, 2020, but deemed as properly filed on 13th January, 2021, with 6 grounds of appeal. The Appellant’s Brief of Argument is dated 9th November, 2020 and filed on 10th November, 2020, but deemed properly filed on 13th January, 2022. Appellant’s counsel formulated four issues for determination to wit: 1.
Whether the trial Court had jurisdiction to continue with the garnishee proceedings during the pendency of the appeal or after an appeal has been entered. (Grounds 1 & 3) 2. Whether the judgment debtor is a necessary party who is supposed to be heard in the garnishee proceedings. (Ground 2) 3.
Whether the decision of the trial Judge to strike out the Appellant’s earlier Motion on Notice for stay of execution with the suit during the proceedings of 4th December, 2019 without giving notice to the counsel to the Appellant indicates a likelihood of bias, judicial rascality and amounts to a breach of fair hearing. (Grounds 3, 5 and 6) 4.
