LawPavilion Online


Back

O. AMANDI ENTERPRISES NIGERIA LIMITED & ANOR v. OBA MICRO FINANCE BANK NIGERIA LIMITED

(2018) LPELR-45087(CA)

In The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

On Friday, the 13th day of July, 2018

CA/E/168/2010


Before Their Lordships

TOM SHAIBU YAKUBU Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

RITA NOSAKHARE PEMU Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

MISITURA OMODERE BOLAJI-YUSUFF Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria


Between

1. O. AMANDI ENTERPRISES NIG LTD
2. BARTHRAM OKAFOR - Appellant(s)

AND

OBA MICRO FINANCE BANK (NIG) LTD - Respondent(s)


Other Citations

; ;


Summary

INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on Law of Contract.
FACTS:
The appeal is against the decision of the Anambra State High Court of Justice, holden at Ogidi, delivered on 17th June, 2010.
The appellants had sued the respondent at the trial Court, claiming certain reliefs. The respondent filed an amended statement of defence and counter claim.
The appellants' case against the respondent was that the respondent, a financial Institution, availed the 1st appellant an overdraft facility of six million naira (N6,000,000.00) for the importation of shirts from China. It was their further case that the parties equally agreed that on the receipt of the goods at the wharf that same would be warehoused by the Respondent. On the receipt of the goods as agreed, the Respondent took delivery of same and kept same in her warehouse. As agreed, the respondent started releasing the said goods to the 1st appellant in batches till at a stage, the respondent refused further release of same claiming that the 1st plaintiff had not kept faith to their agreement by repaying the overdraft facility.
???It was the Appellants' case that because the Respondent refused a further release of the goods, the prices of the said goods depreciated causing the 1st appellant, loss of profit and resulting in the breach of their agreement. As a result of the Respondent's claim of lien over the 2nd appellant's landed property as she had purportedly earlier on taken into her custody the title documents of same as security for the overdraft facility and her undue and unjustified insistence of selling same with the view to recovering the 1st appellant's indebtedness to her, the plaintiffs/Appellants filed this suit.
At the close of trial, the learned trial judge, in his judgment, dismissed the appellants' action and found for the respondent to the effect that the latter's counter-claim succeeded.
Dissatisfied with the decision, the appellants brought this appeal.

ISSUES:
The Court determined the appeal on the respondent's issues as follows:
1. Whether the trial judge was right when he held that the plaintiffs were liable to the defendant to pay the money advanced to the plaintiffs given the circumstances of the case.
2. Whether the plaintiffs proved that the packet shirts were sold at an undervalue and whether the price at which the goods were sold frustrated the contract.
3. Whether the trial judge was right when he held that the defendant was entitled to charge interest on the plaintiffs and whether the interest charged was wrong.
4. Whether the judgment of the learned trial judge was against the weight of evidence.

DECISION/HELD:
In the final analysis, the Court held that the appeal lacked merit and it as accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the decision of the trial Court was affirmed.


Read Full Judgment