GTB v. OJO & ORS (2020)

GTB v. OJO & ORS

(2020)LCN/13953(CA)

In The Court Of Appeal

(KADUNA JUDICIAL DIVISION)

On Tuesday, February 25, 2020

CA/K/71/M/2019

Before Our Lordships:

Saidu Tanko Hussaini Justice of the Court of Appeal

Oludotun Adebola Adefope-Okojie Justice of the Court of Appeal

James Gambo Abundaga Justice of the Court of Appeal

Between

GUARANTY TRUST BANK PLC APPELLANT(S)

And

PASTOR JAMES OLUSEGUN OJO 2. ABIGAIL NATHAN 3. VICENT OMOKARO AGU 4. CHIEF JOHN EZENWA 5. NNALUM CHIBUEZE REMIGUS 6. THADDEUS ADI 7. PRISCILLA ADIS 8. ADI BLESSING THADDEUS 9. ELISHA T. ADI 10. ADI A’ARON THADDEUS 11. ISAAC T. ADI 12. BWHLOSU INTERNATIONAL LTD 13. VICTOR ETUKES 14. VICTOR UYO 15. JOHN GODWIN 16. EDET EMMANUEL 17. FELICIA AGU 18. JOSEPH I. IKEYINA 19. VINCENT YAGUWOM 20. ADELINE EZENWA 21. CHIBUEZE NNOROM 22. GIFT OGUADIMA 23. DIDAM HANATU 24. MARTHA GAMBO 25. NATHANIEL DIDAM 26. DIDAM GAMBO 27. CATHERINE DIDAM SUKA 28. LYDIA A. MAVALLO 29. MARTHA FELIX 30. AKUT PAUL KAWYIP 31. MOSES AKUT KAWYIP 32. VICTORIA AKUT 33. DEBORAH S. DOGARO 34. JAMES BLESSING 35. DIDAM DAUGLAS 36. BASSEY ANDCO 37. KENNETH SANI MALLAM 38. FRANCIS BENEDICT 39. ANGELA P. DUNIYA 40. NASARA ANTHONY 41. SOLOMON DANIEL 42. MALKATU A. HARUNA 43. MARKUS HARUNA 44. DAKAT TIMOTHY 45. ALO BILLY 46. GLORIA BUGA 47. DAVID CHECHET 48. NNEJI KENNETH 49. OLUDE ANTHONY 50. EUCHARIAH ANTHONY 51. ANTHONY OLUDE OKONKWO 52. DANIEL YAHAYA 53. SARAH KURE 54. MAIRO NJERABA 55. MRS CICILAI RICHARD 56. MARBEL ANYIM 57. NUHU MAGAJI 58. KAHINDE JAMES 59. CHINYERE DURU 60. SARAH PHILIP 61. MERCY Z. AROWOLO 62. TANKO SAMAILA 63. ESTHER OKONKWO 64. ISREAL BENEYETTE NWA-AMAKA 65. CLEMENT EVANGELINE 66. HAUWA ADAMU KURAH 67. RACHEAL ADAMU KURA 68. ASABE DAUDA KURA 69. EVELYN DAUDA BIRAT 70. SOLOMON DAUDA 71. SARAH TABAT 72. CHRISTIANA YILMAN’S DANJUMA 73. JANET E. DOWKWAIN 74. EMMANUEL DOWKWAIN 75. BITIYONG J. JOHN 76. MONDAY S. TUKURA 77. USMAN DANJUMA 78. BIYAYA USMAN 79. MARY INUWA 80. AGNESS A. BALA 81. PRECIOUS NANA BALA 82. CAROLINE JOHN KAMBAI 83. JOHN KAMBAI 84. MCDONALD SAMSON AKUT 85. GRACE KULAK ABBA 86. GODSWILL ASHIN 87. ZAKKA JACOBS 88. HAUWA ADAMU KURAH 89. RACHAEL ADAMU KURAH 90. KUDIRAT MUSBOW 91. JAMES OLUTIMI 92. SALAMATU ABDULLAHI 93. LARABA SAMSON 94. MILKATU A. HARUNA 95. ESTHER ADAMU 96. HABILA MAISANDA 97. GIDEON M. SUKWATI 98. ESTHER A. MUSA 99. PEACE CHIBUEZE 100. CHAT ISHAYA 101. VICTORIA D. AROI 102. INNOCENT C. EDEH 103. PAUL ONYEMESILI 104. GLADYS UNAMBA 105. FUNKE SARAH OKELADE 106. TABITHA DICKSON 107. DICKSON JAMES 108. GEOFREY DICKSON 109. EMMANUEL JOSEPH 110. OJO BAMIGBOYE 111. VINCENT DICKSON 112. MONDAY AJAYI 113. MARY AKUCHE 114. KELECHI EKEH 115. BASIL UNAMBA 116. REGINA UNAMBA 117. LARABA GWANI 118. UGWUABA WILFRED O. 119. TITI L. YAYOCK 120. ESTHER ADAMA 121. CORDELIA CLETUS 122. ADAMU FRIDAY 123. OKECHUKWU NNAJI 124. SUNDAY ZACHARIAH 125. DANLADI PHILIBUS 126. ASHIRU MUSA 127. MARIAMU AMOS 128. ILIYA MUSA SAULAWA 129. SAULAWA DANIEL 130. AMOS DANIEL 131. AMINU DANIEL 132. AMINA ILIYA 133. YAKUBU SULE 134. BARNABAS YAKUBU 135. UMARU SULE 136. ISHAYA SULE 137. FILIBUS IBRAHIM 138. SAMAILA SAD AU 139. YOHANA LAZARUS 140. JOHN CHUKWUKA NNAMASI 141. OLIVER ALELE 142. OBELE HOLDING 143. OGBONNA SAMSON 144. CHUKWUMA NNEJI 145. JUSTINA WAJE 146. SLYVESTER WAJE 147. SAMAILA ALIYU 148. MARKUS MUSA 149. ELIZABETH OLOYEDE 150. PADAH STEPHEN 151. ANTHONY LIVETH MADAKI 152. CECILIA DANIEL 153. CONFIDENCE G. ANTHONY 154. CHARITY ISHAYA 155. DANIEL ONOJA 156. MATHEW ONOJA 157. POLINUS N. BAKUT 158. WILLIAMS MUTUAH 159. ITOPHA IBRAHIM 160. NUHU S. KASE 161. MARGARET ESTHER MADAKI 162. BITRUS MUTUAS 163. MAGDALINE MATUAS 164. ZACHARIA BITRUS 165. MOSES JOSHUS 166. PATRICIA T. DODO 167. SARAH SUNDAY 168. PAULINA PIUS 169. ARABIANA KUIMIN 170. MAGDALINE YAKUBU 171. MAQUAL DAVID SIMON 172. KADUNA DALI 173. JOHN CHUKWUMA NNAMANI 174. REBECCAH APOLLOS 175. REBECCA A. JONATHAN 176. MRS JONATHAN REBECCA 177. EMMANUEL APOLLO 178. ABEDNAGO APOLLOS 179. HANATU TANKO 180. MARY TANKO 181. MR MAIWADA AWAW 182. JONATHAN BIYAN 183. CHARITY PETER 184. HOSEA SALEH 185. BANKOLE DEBORAH 186. SHITU WAMU VICTORIA 187. DINATU AHMADU 188. TURU ADAMS ELIZAH 189. MANA BARAU 190. MONDAY SHEKAMMANG 191. ESTHER M. SHEKAMMANG 192. PATRICK DANIEL YATAI 193. MARGARET ADAMU 194. JANET YATAT 195. JOSEPH TAGANG SHEMANG 196. SETH MUGU 197. RUTH S. MUGU 198. BOBAI S. SETH 199. PASTOR HENRY MARCUS GARBA 200. HILARY GARBA ALISHA 201. GRACE IBRAHIM 202. MURNA Z.C. MAIANGWAN 203. RIFKATU D. MAIANGWAN 204. VICTORIA AYE 205. P.T.A KUKAM 206. LAWRENCE M. KATUNG 207. JONAH KUDDAKA 208. MARGARET ISUWA 209. ZAMANI BENEDICT 210. SAMSON KAFFOI 211. GIDEON BALA 212. GROUP L.B 213. COOP STOSTON 214. LARABA BALA 215. ALIYADUNIYA BALA 216. BABA N. BALA 217. ZACHARIAH DIDAM SAWWAI 218. MOSES BALA 219. BAWA MUSA 220. TITUS ADAMU 221. FIDELIS MAIDOBI 222. TADAH STEPHEN 223. BAMAN MOSES 224. LUKA AFANY KANWAI 225. REBECCA W. JONATHAN 226. ZAKI ABASHIYA NEHIMIAH 227. REBECCA MATTHEW 228. MARYAM L. MANZA 229. TYFE GOSPEL 230. MARTIUS KUZAMAW 231. KUZAMAW TACHIO JEREMIAH 232. NICODEMUS YUSUF 233. NICODEMUS IBRAHIM 234. MAXWELL S. OGBUAGU 235. MUSA SALEH YASHIM 236. ANN N. MAXWELL 237. EMMANUEL C. ENYINNAYA 238. CHIMA ENYINNAYA 239. RUTH STEVE NYAN 240. BIHATU G. HARUNA 241. NYAN STEVEN RUTH KUYET 242. GIMBIYA MARTINS 243. MATHA MARTINS 244. ASABE MARTINS 245. HUSAINA EMMANUEL 246. REV. MOSES BAMAI 247. AFINIKI SOLOMON 248. HOSEA ISHAYA 249. JUMMAI HOSEA 250. ROSE KANTU AKA’AS 251. SARAUNIYA YUSUF 252. OBADIAH BITRUS 253. GIDEON BALA 254. JOSEPH ADAMU 255. AMOS MAUDI 256. ELIZABETH KUMAI 257. MARCUS GABRIEL 258. LYNDA RICHARD 259. JONATHAN KWAIMAI 260. LINDA RICHARD 261. MOSES BALA 262. ONOJA DANIEL 263. ANDREW DUNIYA 264. LUCKY DANIEL 265. ADREW ADAMU 266. CECILIA K. NZU 267. SUNDAY M. MAKAMA 268. REBECCA MATHEW BIRAN 269. SARAH SUNDAY 270. JONAH KUDDAKA GAJERE 271. LUKA AFANG KANWAI 272. GLADYS KANTCOK EUNICE 273.TITUS ADAMU 274. KELVIN ADAMU 275. MAIDOBI Y. FIDELIS 276. DAMA CYNTHIA ESSE 277. HANATU JACOB 278. ALICE J. KAJANG 279. RHODA N. ARTHUR 280. MOSES JATAU 281. MOSES JATAU 282. KEVIN YAKUBU 283. OLAOYE DAPO 284. BITRUS MUTUAH 285. ANTHONY LIVETH 286. WILLIAMS MUTUAH 287. MARY D. DANIEL 288. SHEDRACK KUMAI NGU 289. NUHU Y. KASE 290. MARY JONATHAN N. 291. ABEJIDE SAMUEL 292. MICHAEL OLAJIDE 293. REBECCA K.H AFUK 294. REBECCA JONATHAN 295. MAISINYA MAILAFIYA 296. MARY DAUDA 297. SOLOMON K. NGU 298. TIMOTHY HARUNA 299. DORATHY POULINUS 300. POULINUS LUCAS 301. BLESSED PAULINUS 302. DAVID ARUWA 303. MARY MOSES 304. MEEKNESS DAVID 305. DANLADI HARUNNA 306. JUSTINA JOSEPH 307. PLOOL LYOP YAKUBU 308. PATIENCE NDONG 309. EDET SUNDAY A. 310. MARY INUWA 311. DEBORAH S. DOWGARO 312. MOSES AKUT KANYIP 313. AKUT PAUL KANYIP 314. PATRICIA YOHANNA 315. DANJUMA EZEKIEL 316. ENOC KURE RESPONDENT(S)

RATIO

THE TRINITY PRAYERS FOR AN APPLICATION FOR ENLARGEMENT OF TIME

The application filed by the Applicant is what is referred to as the “Trinity Prayers”, the “Three-Legged Prayers” or the “Tripod Prayers”
Order 6 Rules 9 (1) and (2) of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016, provides as follows:
”4 (1) The Court may enlarge the time provided by these Rules for the doing of anything to which these Rules apply… (2) Every application for an enlargement of time within which to appeal shall be supported by an affidavit setting forth good and substantial reasons for failure to appeal within the prescribed period, and by grounds of appeal which prima facie show good cause why the appeal should be heard. When time is so enlarged a copy of the order granting such enlargement shall be annexed to the notice of appeal.” Underlining Mine.
By the Court of Appeal Rules Supra, it is evident that an application for enlargement of time within which to appeal is not granted as a matter of course but is within the discretionary powers of the Court which, as with all discretionary powers, must be exercised judicially and judiciously.
The pre-conditions for the exercise of the Court’s discretion in an applicant’s favour, which must be disclosed in a supporting affidavit, are thus:
i. Good and substantial reasons for failing to appeal within the prescribed period; and
ii. Grounds of appeal which prima facie show good cause why the appeal should be heard.
It is settled law that the two conditions must co-exist. It is not sufficient to satisfy one without the other. See Guaranty Trust Bank v Est Master Construction Ltd (2018) 8 NWLR Part 1622 Page 483 at 495 Para B-G per Augie JSC; Ani v Effiok (2017) 8 NWLR Part 1567 Page 281 at 305 Para B-D per Augie JSC; Itsueli v Securities and Exchange Commission (2016) 6 NWLR Part 1507 Page 160 at 173 Para A-B per Ogunbiyi JSC. To determine if these conditions have been satisfied, recourse is made to the facts before the Court and the Notice of Appeal filed. PER ADEFOPE-OKOJIE, J.C.A.

OLUDOTUN ADEBOLA ADEFOPE-OKOJIE, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The Applicant, Guaranty Trust Bank, filed a Motion, dated 12th February 2019 but filed on 13th February 2019, seeking the following reliefs:
1. AN ORDER for extension of time within which the appellant/applicant may seek leave to appeal against the Ruling of the Kaduna State High Court, Kafanchan Judicial Division, Kafanchan as contained in the ruling of Honourable Justice L.D. ABA delivered on the 10th day of December, 2014 in SUIT NO: KDH/KAF/129/2013, PASTOR JAMES OJO & 315 ORS V. GELDAPS INVESTMENT NIG. LTD.
2. AN ORDER granting leave to the Appellant/Applicant to appeal against the Ruling of the Kaduna State High Court, Kafanchan Judicial Division, Kafanchan as contained in the ruling of Honourable Justice L.D. ABA delivered on the 10th day of December, 2014 in SUIT NO: KDH/KAF/129/2013, PASTOR JAMES OJO & 315 ORS V. GELDAPS INVESTMENT NIG. LTD
3. AN ORDER for extension of time to the Appellant to appeal against the Ruling of the Kaduna State High Court, Kafanchan Judicial Division, Kafanchan, as contained in the ruling of Honourable Justice L.D. ABA

delivered on the 10th day of December, 2014 in SUIT NO: KDH/KAF/129/2013, PASTOR JAMES OJO & 315 ORS V. GELDAPS INVESTMENT NIG. LTD.

The Grounds for the Motion as endorsed thereon are the following:
1. That the lower Court delivered a ruling on the 10th day of December, 2014 which the Appellant/Applicant was dissatisfied with.
2. That at the moment, the Appellant/Applicant though desirous of appealing against the ruling of the lower Court dated the 10th day of December, 2014 is out of time to so do.
3. That the Appellant/Applicant requires the leave of this honourable Court to extend time to appeal against the ruling of the lower Court dated the 10th day of December, 2014 and to file a Notice of appeal pursuant thereto.
4. That this honourable Court has the discretion to grant this application.

In support is an affidavit deposed to by Olalekan Bello, Assistant Litigation Clerk in the chambers of Messrs Dele Olaniyan & Co, Solicitors to the Applicant.

In opposition, the Respondents filed a Counter Affidavit deposed to by Richard Ado, Secretary in the Law Firm of J.O.K. Irikefe & Co, Solicitors to the Respondents.

Both parties, on the directives of the Court, filed Written Addresses.
In the Written Address of the Appellant, filed on 24/9/19, prepared by Toritseju Okitikpi Esq. of Dele Olaniyan & Co, a sole issue was distilled for the Court’s consideration, to wit:
Whether the Applicant has satisfied the conditions for the grant of this application?

The Respondents’ Counsel, J.O.K. Irikefe Esq in the Respondents’ Written Address filed on 7/10/19, distilled two issues for the Court’s determination, namely:
1. Whether the Appellant/Applicants can file the instant application for leave and extension of time to appeal when the initial appeal filed by the Appellant/Applicant had been dismissed by the Court of appeal.
2. Should issue 1 be answered in the positive, whether the Appellant/Applicant has placed enough materials before this Court to enable it exercise its discretion and grant the application for leave and extension of time to appeal.

I shall adopt as the sole issue for determination the issue formulated by the Applicant’s Counsel, under which the issues raised by the Respondents’ Counsel shall be considered.

The issue is:
Whether the Applicant has satisfied the conditions for the grant of this application?

The Applicant’s Counsel has submitted that in determining an application as the present, a Court ought to treat every case on its own peculiar circumstances. Citing Order 6 Rule 9 of the Court of Appeal Rules 2016, he gave as the reason for the application, the fact that the appeal was initially dismissed due to the lack of diligence of the former Counsel, Lekan Ipaye Esq. That the Applicant, sensing that their Counsel, Lekan Ipaye was not diligent, briefed their own firm, which found out that the initial appeal filed had been dismissed. By the time of this awareness, the initial appeal had been dismissed. Carelessness of the erstwhile Counsel was responsible for this dismissal, the delay caused by carelessness should not be visited on the Applicant. Carelessness of Counsel is a good reason, he said for failure to appeal within time. He cited SHANU & ANOR V. AFRIBANK (NIG) PLC (2000) LPELR-3037(SC)Per EMMANUEL OLAYINKA AYOOLA, J.S.C (Pp. 12-13, paras. F-B);

INC. TRUSTEES OF VOICE OF THE LAST DAYS MINISTRY & ORS V. UDENWA & ORS (2018) LPELR-45755(CA) Per THERESA NGOLIKA ORJI-ABADUA, J.C.A. He submitted that an Applicant is required to show an explanation and not a justification for the delay, citing FRANCIS V. OSUNKWO (2000) FWLR PART 14, P. 2469 at 2481, paras D-E.

He argued further that in determining whether the grounds of appeal show good cause, the Court ought not to enquire into the merit or otherwise of the case but find out if the grounds of appeal raise substantial issues of fact or law for the consideration of the Court. He cited GUARANTY TRUST BANK PLC v. EST MASTER CONSTRUCTION LIMITED (2018) 8 NWLR PART 1622, P. 483 Per AMINA ADAMU AUGIE JSC.

Opposing the application, the Respondents’ Counsel pointed out that there was a prior appeal which was dismissed on 3/2/19. Various applications were filed to restore that appeal, which applications were however not heard due to lack of diligence by the Applicant’s Counsel. Realising that the Court, by the Rules of Court does not have power to restore the appeal, brought the instant application to restore an appeal which was dismissed. As this

Court does not have the power under the instant rules to restore an appeal, unlike Order 8 Rule 18 and 20 of the 2011 Rules, this Court lacks the power to restore the appeal in the form of the instant application. He cited the Supreme Court case of Governor of Zamfara State v Gyalange & Ors (2013) 8 NWLR Part 1357 Page 462 at 475-476 Para G-A. He pointed out that the present Counsel had filed a number of applications to restore the former appeal but failed to move them, in consequence of which they were struck out, only for them to bring the instant application. The attempt to put the blame solely on former Counsel was wrong, as the instant Counsel to the Applicants were the culpable ones. If they, rather than file a fresh appeal from 2016 refused to do so, only to file the instant application, are foreclosed. It was the deliberate considered decision of Counsel in filing application to restore an appeal, rather than file a fresh application for leave to appeal, coupled with their refusal to act timeously. He cited County & City Bricks Development Co. Ltd v Hon. Minister of Housing & Urban Development (2019) LPELR-46548, Bako v Donjap (2019) LPELR Page 1 at 13.

The reasons given by the Applicant’s Counsel are not tenable, he said.

In the Reply filed by the Applicants’ Counsel, it was submitted that the appeal had not yet been determined on the merits, a pronouncement not on the merits amounts to a mere striking out. A fresh appeal, in appropriate circumstances can be filed. He cited the cases of Nwaoha v COP (2018) LPELR-44214 SC; Lafferi (Nig.) Ltd v NAL Merchant Bank PLC (2015) LPELR-24726 (SC); UBA v Afrimpex Enterprises Ltd (2017) LPELR-43165 (CA). Length of delay in bringing the application cannot be a good ground to refuse the application, so long as the Applicant proffers good and substantial grounds. He cited Shelni v Bala (2018) LPELR 45376 (CA).

(2) Every application for an enlargement of time within which to appeal shall be supported by an affidavit setting forth good and substantial reasons for failure to appeal within the prescribed period, and by grounds of appeal which prima facie show good cause why the appeal should be heard. When time is so enlarged a copy of the order granting such enlargement shall be annexed to the notice of appeal.” Underlining Mine.
By the Court of Appeal Rules Supra, it is evident that an application for enlargement of time within which to appeal is not granted as a matter of course but is within the discretionary powers of the Court which, as with all discretionary powers, must be exercised judicially and judiciously.
The pre-conditions for the exercise of the Court’s discretion in an applicant’s favour, which must be disclosed in a supporting affidavit, are thus:
i. Good and substantial reasons for failing to appeal within the prescribed period; and
ii. Grounds of appeal which prima facie show good cause why the appeal should be heard.
It is settled law that the two conditions must co-exist. It is not sufficient to satisfy one without the other. See

Guaranty Trust Bank v Est Master Construction Ltd (2018) 8 NWLR Part 1622 Page 483 at 495 Para B-G per Augie JSC; Ani v Effiok (2017) 8 NWLR Part 1567 Page 281 at 305 Para B-D per Augie JSC; Itsueli v Securities and Exchange Commission (2016) 6 NWLR Part 1507 Page 160 at 173 Para A-B per Ogunbiyi JSC.

To determine if these conditions have been satisfied, recourse is made to the facts before the Court and the Notice of Appeal filed.

The facts giving rise to this appeal are largely undisputed. These facts, culled from the unchallenged depositions of the parties and the documents exhibited by Counsel to their various affidavits, are that on the 24th June 2013, the Kaduna State High Court, Kafanchan Judicial Division delivered judgment in Suit No. KDH/KAF/129/2013, Pastor James Ojo and 315 Ors v Geldaps Investment Nig. Ltd, in favour of the Plaintiffs, who are the Respondents herein. In executing judgment against the Defendants therein, the Respondents commenced garnishee proceedings against the Applicant. The lower Court subsequently made a garnishee order absolute against the Applicant on the 10th December 2014, directing it to pay the judgment sum in its

custody in satisfaction of the judgment of the Court. Following an application to the lower Court for a stay of execution pending the appeal it had filed, the Court granted a conditional stay of execution, directing the Applicant to pay the judgment sum into an interest yielding account pending the determination of the appeal. The appeal to this Court, Appeal No.CA/K/236/2015 filed by Lekan Ipaye Esq, was, however, dismissed by this Court on 3/2/16 for want of prosecution.

Various applications filed by the Applicant to relist the appeal were withdrawn by its Counsel on 17/5/16. Further motions were filed by the Applicant and variously adjourned at the instance of the Applicant’s Counsel, spanning 2016-2018. At the fixture of 29/11/18, the Applicant’s Counsel, Mr. Okitikpi withdrew the Motions filed. The said Motions were accordingly struck out with the following order of this Court “The Appeal No. CA/K/230/2016 is hereby deleted”.

The question is thus whether the two-fold questions have been answered in favour of the Applicant, which as directed in the authorities above, should be resolved in favour of the Applicant.<br< p=”” style=”box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px; padding: 0px;”>

</br<>

From the facts deposed to in the affidavits, the order appealed against was made in 2013. The instant application was filed in 2019, five years later. It is not correct that any lapses were by the former Counsel, as the records show that it was a deliberate policy of the current Counsel to proceed with attempts to relist an appeal which had been dismissed and which the extant rules of the Court of Appeal do not allow to be relisted. There must be an end to litigation. Justice is not only for the Applicant but also for the Respondents, who have been waiting since 2013 when judgment was delivered by the lower Court, to have it executed. Admittedly, length of time is not taken into consideration in deserving cases. In the instant case, however, the balance of justice is in refusing this application and I accordingly so do. Costs of N100,000.00 are awarded against the Applicant.

SAIDU TANKO HUSSAINI, J.C.A.: The person who seeks for extension of time to appeal must satisfy twin conditions set out under Order 6 rule 9(1) and (2) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2016, failure of which will render the application to be dismissed.

From the facts leading to this application being made and the same so eloquently set out in the lead judgment, the delay by the applicant, to appeal within the time prescribed for entering their appeal was/is inexcusable. This alone is sufficient reason why the application should fail without further recourse to the question whether or not the grounds of appeal prima facie, show good cause why the appeal should be heard.
I am one with the reasoning and conclusion in the lead Ruling and I adopt same as mine. The application is dismissed with cost assessed in the sum of N100,000.00, against the Applicant and in favour of the Respondents.

JAMES GAMBO ABUNDAGA J.C.A.: I have had the privilege of reading in draft the ruling delivered by my learned brother, Adebola Adesope – Okojie JCA.

I agree and adopt the reasoning and conclusion reached therein.
The application is therefore refused.

Appearances:

Okitikpi for the Applicant For Appellant(s)

J.O.K. Irikefe for all Respondents. For Respondent(s)