Judgment
CHIDI NWAOMA UWA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment) : The High Court of Adamawa State sitting in its appellate jurisdiction presided over by A. A. Waziri, J (as he then was) delivered the judgment that gave rise to this appeal on 25th day of July, 2019. It was made out by the Appellant that he applied and obtained the leave of the lower Court to appeal against the decision of the lower Court, pages 240 – 241. The background facts are that the Appellant as Plaintiff at the Upper Area Court filed Suit No.
UAC3Y/CV/FI/130/2016 against all the Respondents herein as defendants in which the following reliefs were sought: (a) “A declaration of title to a piece of land measuring about 3 hectares situated at Kapo village, Ribadu District, fufore Local Government Area. (b) A declaration that the acts of the defendants/Respondents in ploughing and planting crops on the land in dispute amount to acts of trespass. (c) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants, their agents, privies or representatives from further trespassing on the land in dispute. (d) General damages of N1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira) only for trespass. (e) Cost of the suit” (See pages 11 – 14 of the record).
In reaction to the above claim, the Respondents filed a preliminary objection challenging the suit on the ground of estoppel per rem judicata. The Appellant filed a Counter-Affidavit opposing the Application. The Respondents also filed a reply on points of law. In the ruling of the trial Court of 24th April, 2018 the trial Court dismissed the preliminary objection, the matter was fixed for hearing thereafter. The Respondents appealed to the High Court.
In the lower Court’s judgment of 25th July, 2019, the High Court dismissed the Appellant’s case at the trial Upper Area Court No. 3 Yola on the ground of estoppel per rem judicata. The Appellant dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower Court appealed to this Court in which the following three issues were formulated for the determination of the appeal thus: (i) “Whether the Court below was right in dismissing the Appellant’s Suit No.
UAC3Y/CV/F1/130/2016 between Appellant and Respondents at the Upper Area Court No. 3 Yola on the ground of estoppel per Rem judicata when the parties are not the same, the subject matters of the suits are different and when evidence shows that the plaintiff is not a privy to any of the parties to the previous suits? (Distilled from grounds 3 and 4). (ii) Whether the Learned High Court Judge was right when he relied upon Exhibit D in support of the preliminary objection in holding that the Plaintiff’s/Appellant’s case at the trial Court was Rem judicatam when the judgment in Exhibit D was since set aside by this Court in Appeal No.
