BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Dungus v. Mbudige
  • 232
  • 2004-11-08
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Dungus v. Mbudige

BULAMA DUNGUS

V

KELLU MBUDIGE

BULAMA ABANI

COURT OF APPEAL

( JOS DIVISION )

ALOMA MARIAM MUKHTAR, JCA ( Presided )

IFEYINWA CECILIA NZEAKO, JCA

IKECHI FRANCIS OGBUAGU, JCA ( Read the Lead Judgment )

CA/J/120/2001

THURSDAY, 14TH APRIL, 2004

APPEAL - Issues not placed before the court - Court of Appeal dealing with - Impropriety of

APPEAL - Native courts - Proceedings therein - Attitude of appellate courts to

COURT - Native courts - Proceedings therein - Attitude of appellate courts to

ESTOPPEL - Estoppel per rem judicata - Defence of - When will succeed

ESTOPPEL - Estoppel per rem judicata - Successful plea of - Scope of operation of JURISDICTION - Importance of

Issue:

Whether from the 5 records of proceedings before the Court of Appeal, res judicata could be pleaded.

[2004]  All F.W.L.R                                             Dungus vs. Mbudige                                                        1497

Facts:

The parties herein and their privies had litigated on land/village at the Area and Upper Area Courts before the appeal to the High Court. At the Gulumba Area Court, the parties were Dungus Khurso vs. Bulama Hassan. The judgment was in favour of the defendant.

Dungus’ appeal to the Upper Area Court was successful and the court ordered a retrial of the case at the Bama Area Court II. After retrial, judgment was again given in favour of the defendant.

On 7th January, 1997, the appellant herein sued the 1st respondent at the Buma Area Court I. He lost the case. His appeal to the Upper Area Court where Aban Mbudije was joined as a co-appellant, was successful. Dissatisfied, the respondents (herein) appealed to the High Court, which court allowed the appeal and set aside the decisions of the Bama Area Court I and that of the Upper Area Court, declaring them as nullities and held inter alia that the only valid and subsisting judgment is the decision of the Bama Area Court II. Dissatisfied, the appellants appealed to the Court of Appeal.