Set Aside

A judgment or order of Court remains in force and binding on the parties until it is set aside. Service of Court processes may be a jurisdictional issue which can be raised at any stage of a case. However when a trial Court has determined and made pronouncement on that issue, a party who is aggrieved must follow the right course that is appeal challenging the pronouncement must go through the Court of Appeal before a subsequent appeal from the Court of Appeal can be heard and determined in this Court.
See Rossek v. ACB Ltd (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt. 312) 382, S.233 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999, Babatunde v. Olatunde (2000) 2 NWLR (Pt.646) 568.

The stance of the appellant clearly goes against the basic principle that orders of Court are deemed valid until set aside by the same Court or on appeal. This position is well stated by this Court in the case of Babatunde v Olatunde (2000) 2 NWLR (Pt. 646) 568.
"A judgment of a Court of competent jurisdiction remains valid and binding, even where the person affected by it believes that it is void, until it is set aside by a Court of competent jurisdiction. The position therefore is that a person who knows of a judgment, whether null or void, given against him by a Court of competent jurisdiction cannot be permitted to disobey it. His unqualified obligation is to obey it unless and until that judgment has been set aside."

It is well settled law, that the judgment of a competent Court subsists and remains binding until it is set aside on appeal. That is not the position in this instant case since the judgment of the trial Court was never set aside. See OJO AJAO & Ors Vs OPOOLA ALAO & Ors [1986] NWLR (pt.45) 802; AMIDA & Ors Vs TAIYE OSHOBOJA (1984)768 at 76/77; ROSSEK v. ACB Ltd (1993)10 SCNJ 20 or [1993] NWLR (Pt. 312) 382; EZEOKAFOR vs EZEILO (1999) 9 NWLR (619) 513; GOMWALK Vs MILAD PLATEAU STATE (1998) 7 NWLR (Pt.558) 413.