Rivers State Judiciary

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA

IN THE PORT HARCOURT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT

HOLDEN AT PORT HARCOURT

ON FRIDAY THE 4^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2023

BEFORE HIS WORSHIP A. O. AMADI-NNA, ESQ

CHIEF MAGISTRATE GD.1

SUIT NO. PMC/SCC/71/2023

BETWEEN

NKAMBI JOSEPH POSI

(MYTIME COOPERATIVE)

OTAMIRI UGOCHI PATRICIA

Parties absent.

U. Amadi appear for the claimant.

Matter is for Judgment.

JUDGMENT

The claimants claim against the defendant is for;

The sum of N159,000.00 being money collected from Rumuokoro Mytime Cooperative Society Ltd, which has remained unpaid.
The sum of N100,000.00 as legal fees.
The sum of N50,000.00 as cost.

In proof of their case the claimant called only one witness who gave evidence as CW1 and tendered 4 exhibits, Exhibits “A1” to “A4” while the defendant did not appear before this court and did not defend this suit.

CW1 Nkambi Josephine Posi said she is the Manager of the claimant, Mytime Cooperative Limited and the defendant is a member of the Cooperative. That the defendant collected a loan of N100,000.00 in April 2022 and promised to pay the sum of N7,000.00 on weekly which was to run for 4 weeks but she did not keep up to the terms of her payment. Further that the defendant filled a loan form and brought a Guarantor as her witness, gave them a receipt of her deep freezer, her national ID card and that of her Guarantor. She tendered them as exhibits “A1” to “A4” respectively.

On the 18^th day of July 2023 when the matter came up for cross examination of CW1, the defendant was not in court to cross examine CW1 and was foreclosed from cross examining CW1.

On the 31^st day of July 2023 claimant’s counsel adopted his final written address dated the 28^th and filed the 31^st day of July 2023 as the final address for the claimant in this case.

In his address claimant’s counsel submit that this Honourable court is enjoined to consider the whole evidence of both parties and give its Judgment thereon, after both parties have concluded their cases but when the defendant deliberately refused to appear before the court, the court will determine the matter based on the evidence before it. Further that in the instant case the only evidence before the court is that of the claimant and submits that it is the only evidence that the court will rely on to decide this case.

Counsel submits that following the decision in EBEINWE V STATE (2011) 7 NWLR (Part 124) page 402 at 416 that evidence that is neither challenged nor rebutted remains good and credible evidence which the court is enjoined to rely upon and ascribe probative value to it.

I have reviewed the evidence of CW1 the claimant and I have also taken into consideration Exhibits “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” tendered.

The lone issue that arise for determination before this court is “whether the claimant has proved her case on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment”.

CW1, the claimant has given evidence that the defendant is the Manager of their Cooperative called My time Cooperative and collected a loan of N100,000.00 in April 2022 and promised to pay the sum of N7,000.00 weekly to run for 16 weeks but she did not keep to the terms of her payment. CW1 has also given evidence that the defendant filled a loan firm and brought a Guarantor as her witness, gave them the receipt of her deep freezer, her National ID card and that of her Guarantor and tendered them as Exhibits “A1 – A4 respectively. The defendant did not defend this suit and did not appear before this court. An undefended case requires a minimum of proof. Further when evidence is not challenged, the court ought to accept such evidence in proof of the issue in contest. See the case of FOLORUNSHO & ANOR. V. SHALOUB (1994) 3 NWLR, (Part 333) page 413 at 433 Paras B-H. Also see OKUPE V IFMACHI (1994) 3SC Page 97 at 103.

I hereby hold that the claimant has proved her case on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment.

Accordingly Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the claimant on the following terms;

Court:

The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N159,000.00 (One Hundred and Fifty Nine Thousand Naira) being money collected from Rumuokoro Mytime Cooperative Society Limited as loan which has remained unpaid.
The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Naira) as cost.

Signed:

Amadi-Nna, Esq.

Chief Magistrate GD.1

4/8/2023

IN THE MAGISTRATE COURT OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA

IN THE PORT HARCOURT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT

HOLDEN AT PORT HARCOURT

ON TUESDAY THE 18^TH DAY OF JULY, 2023

BEFORE HIS WORSHIP A. O. AMADI-NNA, ESQ

CHIEF MAGISTRATE GD.1

SUIT NO. PMC/SCC/70/2023

BETWEEN

NKAMBI JOSEPH POSI

FAMOKUN SUNDAY ROLAND

Claimant present.

Defendant absent.

I. Nwanyanwu appear for the claimant.

JUDGMENT

The claimant claims against the defendant as follows:-

The sum of N322,802.00 (Three Hundred and Twenty Two Thousand, Eight Hundred and Two Naira) only being loan collected from Rumuokoro Mytime Cooperative Society Limited which the defendant has refused to pay despite repeated demands.
Legal fees of N100,000.00.
Cost of N50,000.00.

A plea of not liable was entered for the defendant.

In proof of his case the claimant was the sole witness and gave evidence as CW1 and tendered 3 exhibits, Exhibits “A”, “B” and “C” while the defendant did not defend this suit and never appeared before this court.

CW1, Nkambi Josephine Posi said that the defendant is one of the members of the Mytime Cooperative who contracted a loan of N500,000.00 sometime in February 2021 and did not pay as agreed after initially commencing payment and later defaulted.

Further that the defendant in obtaining this loan filled a Cooperative loan form, wrote a hand written application and gave them a picture of his industrial generator to show that he collected a loan from them. She tendered the loan form, a picture of the defendants industrial generator and the defendant’s loan application form as Exhibits “A”,”B” and “C” respectively. Also that before this suit was filed the defendant was owing the sum of N372,800.00 (Three Hundred and Seventy Two Thousand Eight Hundred Naira) only.

The defendant was not in court on the 4^th day of July 2023 when the matter came up for cross examination and was foreclosed from cross examining CW1. The defendant was also foreclosed from defending this suit on the application of the claimant’s counsel.

On the 12^th day of July 2023 the claimant adopted the claimant’s final written address dated 11^th and filed 12^th day of July 2023 as the final address for the claimant.

In his address claimant’s counsel submits that this Honourable Court is enjoined to consider the whole evidence of both parties and give its Judgment thereon after both parties have concluded their case. That the defendant having deliberately refused to appear before the court, the court will determine the matter based on the evidence before it.

Further that the only evidence before this court in the instant case is that of the claimant. Submits that it is the only evidence the court will rely on to decide this case.

Counsel submits that evidence that is neither challenged nor rebutted remains good and credible evidence which the court is enjoined to rely upon and ascribe probative value to it.

I have reviewed the evidence of the claimant, CW1. I have also taken into consideration Exhibits “A”, “B” and “C” tendered and the written submissions of the claimant’s counsel.

The lone issue that arise for determination is “whether the claimant has proved her case on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment”.

CW1 the claimant has given evidence of how the defendant obtained a loan of N500,000.00 sometime in February 2021 and after initially commencing payment later defaulted. CW1 has also given evidence that in collecting the loan, the defendant filled a Cooperative loan form, wrote a hand written application and gave them a picture of his industrial generator which she tendered as Exhibits “A”, “B” and “C” respectively. The defendant did not cross examine CW1 and did not defend this suit. An undefended case requires a minimum of proof. When uncontradicted evidence is unchallenged, the court ought to accept such evidence in proof of the issue in contest. See the case of FOLURUNSHO & ANOR V. SHALOUB (1994) 3 NWLR (Pt. 333) page 413 at 433 para B-H.

Also see OKUPE V. IFEMACHI (1974) 3SC Page 97 at 103. ALAGBE v. ABIMBOLA (1978) 2SC Page 39 at 40.

I hereby hold that the claimant has proved her case on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to her claim. Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the claimant in the following terms;

COURT:

The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N372,802.00 (Three Hundred and Seventy Two Thousand Eight Hundred and Two Naira) only being loan collected from Rumuokoro Mytime Cooperative Society Ltd which the defendant has refused to pay despite repeated demands.
The defendant is to pay to the claimant he sum of N100,000.00 as cost.

Signed:

O. Amadi-Nna, Esq.

Chief Magistrate GD.1

18/7/2023

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA

IN THE PORT HARCOURT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT

HOLDEN AT PORT HARCOURT

ON MONDAY THE 31^ST DAY OF JULY, 2023

BEFORE HIS WORSHIP A. O. AMADI-NNA, ESQ

CHIEF MAGISTRATE GD.1

SUIT NO. PMC/SCC/79/2023

BETWEEN

IBANGA NDIANA-ABASI EMMANUEL

JUDE OBIOHA & ANOR

Claimant present.

Defendants absent.

O. Amadi appear for the claimant.

JUDGEMENT

The claimant’s claim against the defendant is for the sum of N2,992,000.00 (Two Million Nine Hundred and Ninety Two Thousand Naira) being outstanding balance of the loan the defendant collected from the claimant which he has failed to pay till date.

A plea of not liable was entered for the defendant.

In proof of his case the claimant gave evidence as CW1 and tendered 3 exhibits, Exhibits “A”, “B” and “C” and did not call any other witness.

CW1 Ibanga Ndiana Abasi Samuel said that sometime in July 2022 the defendants came to his house and asked for a loan of N2,800,000.00 (Two Million Eight Hundred Thousand Naira) to enable them continue with their trade. They promised to pay his 16.6% of the N2,800,000.00 monthly for a period of 3 months to amount to N3,995,000.00 (Three Million, Nine Hundred and Ninety Five Thousand Naira) for the interest and the capital. Further that after the first 3 months they could not make any payment to him. That however on the 5^th month they started making some payment and they have so far paid N2,125,000.00 (Two Million One Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand Naira). They promised to pay the balance amounting to N1,870,000.00 before the 31^st day of January, 2023.

They agreed that if they failed to pay the balance, a 15% monthly interest will be reading on this balance. He tendered the agreement titled outstanding loan balance as Exhibit “A”. He further said that up till now they have not paid the balance. Also that before they took the loan they handed over to him a Deed of Conveyance as security for the loan. He tendered a photocopy of the Deed of Conveyance as Exhibit “B” while the affidavit of loss of the original Deed of Conveyance was tendered as Exhibit “C”. Further that the defendants have sold of the property on the Deed of Conveyance and are no longer living there.

On the 20^th day of July 2023 when the matter came up for cross examination of CW1, the defendants were not in court to cross examine CW1 and were foreclosed from cross examining CW1.

The claimants counsel then informed the court that they have closed their case.

That case was then adjourned to the 26^th day of July 2023 for defence.

On the 26^th day of July 2023 when the matter came up for defence the defendant were not in court to defend the case and they were foreclosed from defending this case. Claimants counsel then informed the court that they were waiving their right to address the court and that Judgment be entered based on their evidence before the court.

I have reviewed the evidence of CW1, the claimant. I have also taken into consideration all the Exhibits “A” “B” and “C” tendered before this court.

The issue that arise for determination is “whether the claimant has proved his claims to be entitled to judgment”.

The claimant CW1 has given evidence of how the defendants obtained from him a loan of N2,800,000.00 to enable them continue with their trade. He has also given evidence of how the defendant promised to pay 16% of the N2,800,000.00 monthly for a period of 3 months to amount to N3,995,000.00 for the interest and capital. He further gave evidence that the defendants have so far paid the sum of N125,000.00 after which they promised to pay the balance of N1,870,000.00 before the 31^st day of January 2023. He further has also said that they agreed that if they don’t pay the balance before that day a 15% monthly interest will be reading on the balance. CW1 has also tendered Exhibits “A1, the agreement titled outstanding loan balance, Exhibit “B” a photocopy of the Deed of Conveyance and Exhibit “C” affidavit of loss of original Deed of Conveyance.

The defendants did not defend this suit and did not appear before this court.

An undefended case requires a minimum of proof. When evidence is not challenged the court ought to accept such evidence as proof of the issue in contest. See the case of FOLARIN & ANOR V. SHALOUB (1994) 3 NWLR (Part 333) page 413 at 443 paras B-H. Also see OKUPE V IFEMACHI (1974) 3SC Page 97 at 103.

I hereby hold that the claimant has proved his claim on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment.

Court:

The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N2,992,000.00 (Two Million Nine Hundred and Ninety Two Thousand Naira) being outstanding balance of the loan the defendant collected from the claimant which he has failed to pay till date.

Signed:

O. Amadi-Nna, Esq.

Chief Magistrate GD.1

31/7/2023

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA

IN THE PORT HARCOURT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT

HOLDEN AT PORT HARCOURT

ON WEDNESDAY THE 21^ST DAY OF JUNE, 2023

BEFORE HIS WORSHIP A. O. AMADI-NNA, ESQ

CHIEF MAGISTRATE GD.1

SUIT NO. PMC/SCC/13/2023

BETWEEN

NKAMBI JOSEPHINE POSI

(MYTIME COOPERATIVE)

NNA EMEKA ADAMS

Parties absent.

N. Obua appear for the claimant.

JUDGMENT

The claimant’s claim against the defendant is for failing and/or refusing to pay the sum of N318,000.00 which the defendant collected from the claimant as loan.

The claimant also claims the sum of N50,000.00 as cost of this action.

In proof of her claim the claimant gave evidence as CW1 and was the only witness in support of her claim while the defendant did not appear before this court and did not defend this suit.

The claimants case is as follows:-

CW1, Nkambi Josephine Posi said that she works with Mytime Cooperative and the defendant is one of their members who collected loan from her sometime in February 2022 and promised to pay in 8 months but the period passed and he did not pay as promised. That at the time they filed this suit the defendant was owing the sum of N318,000.00.

Further that the defendant in obtaining the loan filled a loan form, a hand written application and deposed to an affidavit. She tendered them as Exhibits “A1”, “A2” and “A3” respectively. At the close of the evidence of CW1 the case was adjourned for cross examination of CW1

but on the 26^th day of June, 2023 when the matter came up for cross examination of CW1 the defendant was not in court to cross examine CW1 and was foreclosed from cross examining CW1.

The claimant then closed her case and the matter was adjourned for defence.

On the 13^th day of June 2023, the defendant was not in court to defend this case and the claimant’s counsel went ahead and adopted his final written address filed on the 13^th day of June 2023.

Claimants submits in his address that having regard that the defendant refused to appear before this court, the court is enjoined to consider the evidence adduced by the claimant and give Judgment in favour of the claimant.

Submits that evidence that is neither challenged nor rebutted remains good and credible evidence which the court is enjoined to rely upon and ascribe probative value. Counsel refer to EBEINWE Vs. STATE (2011) 7 NWLR (Part 1246) page 402 at 416.

I have reviewed the evidence of CW1 and carefully considered the submissions of the claimants counsel and the exhibits tendered. The issue that arise for determination is whether the claimant has proved her case in the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment.

CW1 the claimant has given evidence of how the defendant collected loan from their cooperative and promised to pay back in 8 months time and failed to do so. CW1 has tendered exhibits “A1”, “A2” and “A3” that is the loan form filled by the defendant, the defendants hand written application and the affidavit deposed to by the defendant before he collected the loan. CW1 has also told the court that the defendant is owing the sum of N318,000.00.

The defendant did not defend this suit or appear before this court. An undefended case requires a minimum of proof.

Uncontroverted evidence is deemed admitted and when evidence is deemed admitted the court ought to accept such evidence in proof of the issue in contest.

See the case of FOLORUNSHO Vs. SHALOUB (1997) 3 NWLR (Pt 333) page 413 at 433 paras B-H.

Accordingly from the foregoing I hereby hold that the claimant has proved her case in the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment. Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the claimant in the following terms.

Court:

The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N318,000.00 which the defendant collected from the claimant as loan.
The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N30,000.00 as cost.

Signed:

O. Amadi-Nna, Esq.

Chief Magistrate GD.1

21/6/2023

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA

IN THE PORT HARCOURT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT

HOLDEN AT PORT HARCOURT

ON WEDNESDAY THE 31^STDAY OF MAY, 2023

BEFORE HIS WORSHIP A. O. AMADI-NNA, ESQ

CHIEF MAGISTRATE GD.1

SUIT NO. PMC/SCC/06/2023

BETWEEN

JOHNSON EKOWO

IFEANYI EJIMS

Parties absent

W. Jumbo appear for the claimant.

JUDGMENT

The claimant’s claim against the defendant is for (i) the sum of N3,480,000.00 (Three Million Four Hundred and Eighty Thousand Naira) which the defendant is indebted to the claimant. ii 15% interest until Judgment is delivered.

iii. The sum of N5,000,000.00 (Five Million Naira) for general damages.

A plea of not liable was entered for the defendant.

In proof of his case the claimant gave evdience as CW1 by adopting his written deposition dated and filed 17^th day of April 2023 on the 17^th day of April 2023 as his evidence in this case before this court.

In his deposition CW1 stated that on the 20^th day of June, 2022 the defendant collected the sum of N725,000.00 (Seven Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand Naira) from him with the understaning that he would refund or pay him back the money in 3 months time. That the 3 months time lapsed or expired on 20^th september 2022 and the defendant failed, refused or neglected to pay him back the money. The defendant undertook to pay him 15% monthly interest of the capital sum if he failed to retun the money in 3 months time as he promised. That the 20^thSeptember 2022 when the 3 months expired till date is now 7 months. That on the 8^th day of July 2022 the defendant collected another N725,000.00 (Seven Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand Naira) from him with the same understanding that he would refund or pay back the money in 3 months time. The 3 months lapsed or expired on the 8^th day of October 2022 and the defendant has failed, refused or neglected to pay him back the money. The defendant undertook to pay him 15% monthly interest of the capital sum if he failed to return the money in 3 months time as he promised. That the 8^th October, 2022 when the 3 months expired till date is now 6 months. He further stated that on the 5^th day of August 2022 the defendant further collected money from him again at the same amount of N725,000.00 with the same understanding that he would refund or pay back in 3 months time. The 3 months time lapsed on the 5^th of November 2022 and the defendant failed, refused or neglected to pay him back the money. That the defendant undertook to pay him 15% monthly interest of the capital sum if he failed to return the money in 3 months time as promised. That the 5^th day of November 2022 when the 3 months expired till date isnow 5 months. He further said that the capital sum the defendant collected from him totalled N2,175,000.00 while the interest totaled N1,957,500.00 and the capital sum plus interest equals N4,132,500.00. He also said that he served the defendant a demand letter dated 16^th February 2023 which the defendant neglected to comply with. That the sum on the demand letter was calculated in the month of February 2023 and that the total outstanding debt of the defnedant as at today is N4,132,500.

He further said that he has incurred cost in pursuit of this debt from the defendant. He spent about N20,000.00 to file and engage Bailif to serve the court processes. That the defendant has breached the agreement and that he should pay him general damages of N1,000,000.00. Further that the defendant brought a witness who witnessed the undertaking and the witnesses name is Samuel Chinwoh.

He tendered the undertakings or agreements as Exhibits “A1”-“A3” and the letter of demand as Exhibit “A4”.

When the matter came up on the 15^th day of May 2023 for cross examination of CW1, the defendant was not in court to cross examine CW1 and was foreclosed from cross examining CW1. The claimant then informed the court that he has closed his case and the matter was adjourned for defence.

On the 17^th day of May 2023 when the matter came up for defence the defendant was not in court to defend the case and was foreclosed from defending this suit. The claimant adopted his final written address dated 20^th and filed 22^nd day of May 2023 as the final address for the claimant in this suit.

In his address, the claimant raised a lone issue for determination before this court, that is;

“whether the claimant has complied and proved his case as required by law in civil case and small claims to entitle him to his claim”.

Counsel states that both parties had a simple contract and a simple understanding but the defendant failed and breached the contract. Submits that the claimant is entitled to remedies where the defendant breaches the contract or agreement freely and willingly without any form of fraud. Counsel referred to the case of AGU vs. GENERAL OIL LTD (2015) 62 (PT. 2) NSCQR 672.

That it is in evidence that the total sum payable by the defendant as at the time the evidence was given by CW1 was a total sum of N4,132,500.00. Further that the claimant has complied with the requirement of the Rivers State Small Claims Court Practice Direction as provided in Article 2(i) (e) of 2023 by issuing and serving a Demand letter on the defendant before commencing this action of issuing and serving summons. That CW1 had adopted his depositions on oath as exhibits “A1” – “A4” before this court. Further that the defendant was earlier represented by a lawyer who refused to cross examine CW1 but rather opted for settlement which was a mere ploy to delay the matter. That the defendant was foreclosed from cross eamining CW1 and also later foreclosed from defending this case, hence this final written address.

Submits that unchallenged evidence is admitted as the true evidence. Counsel referred to the cases of ARUM vs NWOBODO (2013) 54 (Pt 2) NSCQR 866, ALHAJI USMAND BUA vs BASHIRU DAUDA (2003) 13 NWLR (Pt. 838) 657.

Ihave reviewed the evidence of the claimant, CW1. I have also taken into consideration the written submissions of counsel and all the exhibits tendered.

The lone issue that arise for determination is “whether the claimant has proved his claim on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to his claim”.

CW1 the claimant has given evidence through written deposition of how the defendant collected from him the sum of N725,000.00, three times and was to pay within 3 months and failure to comply within 3 months the defendant would pay interest of 15% for every defaulting month. He has also given evidence that the total sum payable by the defendant as at the time of giving evidence was N4,132,500.00. CW1 has also tendered in evidence Exibits “A1-“A3”, undertakings or agreements and “A4” the demand letter he served on the defendant as provided by the Rivers State Small Claims Court Practice Direction Article 2(1) of 2023. The defendant did not defend this suit.

The defendant’s counsel only appeared before this court once and abandoned the case while the defendant never appeared before this court. Uncontroverted evidence is deemed admitted. Also when evidence is unchallenged the court ought to accept such evidence in proof of the issue in contest. See the case of FOLURUNSHO & ANOR vs SHALOUB (1994) 3 NWLR (PT. 333) Page 413 at 433 paras B-H. Also see OKUPE vs IFEMACHI (1974) 35C page 97 at 103. ALAGBE vs ABIMBOLA (1978) 2 SC Page 39 at 40.

I hereby hold that the claimant has proved his claim on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment.

Accordingly Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the claimant in the following terms:-

Court:

The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N4,132,500 (Four Million One Hundred and Thirty Two Thousand, Five Hundred Naira) as the totel debt owed by the defendant to the claimant as at April 2023.
The defendant to the claimant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N300,000.00 as general damages.
The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N20,000.00 as cost.

Signed:

O. Amadi-Nna, Esq.

Chief Magistrate GD.II

31/5/2023

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA

IN THE PORT HARCOURT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT

HOLDEN AT PORT HARCOURT

ON WEDNESDAYTHE 19^THDAY OF APRIL, 2023

BEFORE HIS WORSHIP A. O. AMADI-NNA, ESQ

CHIEF MAGISTRATE GD.1

CLAIM NO. PMC/SCC/07/2023

BETWEEN

NSE AKPAN

NELSON GODSON

Claimant present.

Defendant absent.

C. Ndah appear for the claimant.

JUDGMENT

The claimant claims against the defendant the sum of N4,253,000.00 (Four Million Two Hundred and Fifty Three Thousand Naira) being indebtedness on account of the purchase of 120 bags of rice from the claimant on or about May 2022.

In proof of his claim the claimant gave evidence as CW1 and tendered Exhibits ‘A1’, ‘A2’ and ‘A3’. While the defendant did not defend this case.

The claimant’s case is as follows:

CW1 Nse Akpan said he is a businessman who trades on food items while the defendant is his customer who usually buys goods from and supply and bring back the money to pay him and collect another one. That the last goods the defendant collected from him last year was 120 bags of rice at the cost of N3,996,000.00. When he waited until the end of August last year, 2022, the defendant did not pay him, he went to the defendant who told him that the company had not paid him. He waited until end of September, 2022 and went to the defendant’s house who told him that the company had still not paid him. Further that in October 2022 the defendant issued him 2 cheques. One was dated 19^th of October 2022 valued N1,986,000.00 while the other one was dated 28^th October valued N2,010,000.00. That before this time the defendant had come to his shop and collected good valued N257,000.00. He also said that when he went to the bank and presented the first cheque, the sum of N1,986,000.00, the bank dishonoured the cheque saying there was insufficient funds. That on the 23^rd day of October 2022 he presented the second cheque of N2,010,000.00 the bank also dishonoured the cheques saying he should take it back to the defendant that there is a mistake on the face of the cheque. The defendant now asked him to wait that he will pay the money. He then waited until around 2^nd February 2023 when he contacted his lawyer who sent a letter of demand to the defendant who did not contact or reach him and he then instructed his lawyer to file this claim.

He tendered the cheques the defendant issued to him as Exhibits ‘A1’ and ‘A2’ and the letter of demand issued to the defendant as Exhibit ‘A3’. He further said that the defendant is owing him the total sum of N4,253,000.00. He prayed the court to help him recover his money.

On the 5^th day of April, 2023 when the matter came up for cross examination of CW1, the defendant was not in court to cross examine CW1 and he was foreclosed from cross examining CW1. The claimant’s counsel then informed the court that they have closed their case and the case was adjourned for defence.

On the 6^th day of April, 2023 when the matter came up for defence the defendant was not in court to defend the case and was foreclosed from defending the case.

Claimant’s counsel adopted the claimant’s final written address dated and filed the 14^th day of March 2023 on the 18^th day of March 2023 as the claimant’s final argument in this case.

In his address claimant’s counsel raised a lone issue for determination. That is; “Whether the claimant is entitled to Judgment, his evidence having been unchallenged or uncontroverted”.

Counsel submits that the claimant is entitled to Judgment. That that law is trite that unchallenged and uncontroverted evidence ought to be acted upon by trial court. Counsel referred to the case of IKULUGHAN & ORS Vs. OKULU & ORS (2021) LPELR – 56103 (CA).

Further that in the instant case the defendant failed to enter appearance after service of the summons on him. That the claimant led evidence which was unchallenged and never controverted to show that there was a transaction between the parties. Exhibits ‘A1’, ‘A2’ and ‘A3’ were tendered in evidence, the cheques issued by the defendant and the demand letter from the claimant’s counsel to the defendant.

Counsel urged the court to accept and act on the unchallenged evidence of the claimant and grant the reliefs sought by the claimant.

I have reviewed the evidence of CW1 for the claimant. I have also taken into consideration the exhibits tendered and the written submission of counsel. The issue that arise for determination before this court is “whether the claimant has proved his claim on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment”. The claimant CW1, has given evidence of how the defendant who usually buys foods from him collected 120 bags of rice last year, 2022 worth N3,996,000.00 and has not paid this money since then. He has also given evidence that the defendant further collected goods from him valued N257,000.00. He has tendered as Exhibits ‘A1’, ‘A2’ and ‘A3’, the cheques issued to him by the defendant and the demand letter issued by his lawyer to the defendant. He has also said the defendant is owing him a total of N4,253,000.00.

The defendant did not defend this suit and never appeared before this court.

An undefended case requires a minimum of proof. The defendant not having adduced any evidence in their defence, the trial court is entitled to find for the claimant based on the claimant’s evidence. The defendant is deemed to have accepted the evidence of the claimant. See the case of OKPOKPO COMMUNITY BANK LTD Vs. IGWE P. C. (2013) 15 NWLR (Part 1376) 167, OKUPE Vs. IFEMACHI (1974) SC 97 at 103.

Accordingly from the foregoing I hereby hold that the claimant has proved his case on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to Judgment.

Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the claimant in the following terms:

Court: The defendant is to pay to the claimant the sum of N4,253,000.00 (Four Million Two Hundred and Fifty Three Thousand Naira) being indebtedness on account of his purchase of 120 bags of rice from the claimant on or about May, 2022.

Signed:

O. Amadi-Nna, Esq.

Chief Magistrate GD.II

19/4/2023

IN THE SMALL CLAIMS COURT OF RIVERS STATE OF NIGERIA

IN THE PORT HARCOURT MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT

HOLDEN AT PORT HARCOURT

ON MONDAY THE 15^THDAY OF MAY, 2023

BEFORE HIS WORSHIP A. O. AMADI-NNA, ESQ

CHIEF MAGISTRATE GD.1

SUIT NO. PMC/SCC/17/2023

BETWEEN

NKAMBI JOSEPHINE POSI

JOSEPH EZE & ANOR

Parties absent.

U. Amadi appear for the claimant.

JUDGMENT

The claimant’s claim against the defendant is for “the sum of N1,300,000.00 (One Million Three Hundred Thousand Naira) only which the defendant collected from the claimant as loan.

The sum of N50,000.00 (Fifty Thousand Naira) as cost.

In proof of his case the claimant was the only witness who gave evidence as CW1 in support of this and tendered 2 exhibits. Exhibits “A1” and “A2” while the defendant for his defence gave evidence as DW1 and was the only witness in his defence and did not tender any exhibit.

The claimant’s case is as follows:-

CW1, Nkambi Joseph Posi said she manages and runsMytime Cooperative as the General Manager. That the 1^st defendant collected a loan from Mytime Cooperative while the 2^nd defendant is the Guarantor. The 1^st defendant applied for N1,000,000.00 loan and N1,000,000.00 was given to him. That by the time this case was filed the 1^st defendant was with a balance loan of N1, 132,820.00. She tendered a loan application form and a loan form as Exhibits “A1” and “A2” respectively. She further said that the 1^st defendant has not repaid the loan and prayed the court to help them recover the loan.

The defendants did not cross examined in the witness.

This is the case for the claimant.

DW1, Joseph Eze the 1^st defendant said in 2018 the claimants agents came to his shop and introduced their Cooperative to him and offered to give him loan at 30 percent interest and asked him to come and register with them. He went and registered with them in 2018. In 2019, they gave him a loan of N350,000.00. By then he has saved the sum of N130,000.00 with them. He used this loan to buy a car and gave it out on hire purchase. They further gave him loan up to 4 times and he paid off all of them. He now sold his car and gave them the money and they used the money to up grade his savings to N330,000.00 which now qualified him for a loan of N1.1 Million. He was now given N550,000.00 instead of over N800,000 since they had to deduct his debt. He used the money to buy a car which was given him problems. He went to them again and they gave him N100,000.00 which could not solve the problem. He now sold the car and gave them N100,000.00. He pleaded with them to be paying them N30,000.00 per month but they refused and he was sued to court.

Under cross examination DW1 said he was owing the claimant the sum of N950,000.00 prior to the current loan and he is still owing N950,000.00. That he was not the one that wrote Exhibit “A2” and the signature in Exhibit “A2” is not his.

This is the case for the defence.

On the 10^th day of May 2023 the claimant’s counsel adopted the claimant’s final written address dated 2^nd and filed 10^th day of May 2023 as the final address for the claimant in this case.

In his address claimant’s counsel submits that the defendants have substantially admitted the claims of the claimant in that:

They have admitted that he applied for a loan from the claimant.
The claimant granted his request and gave him the loan although he denied that he was given N1,100,000.00.
That prior to collecting the loan from the claimant, the 1^st defendant was indebted to the claimant.
The 1^st defendant used part of the loan to settle his previous indebtedness to the claimant.
That he defaulted in the payment of the loan.

Counsel submits following the decision inEbeinwe v State (2011) FWLR

(part 1246) page 402 at 416, that evidence that is neither challenged nor rebutted remains good and credible evidence which the court is enjoined to rely upon and ascribe probative value to it.

I have reviewed the evidence of CW1 the claimant and DW1 the defendant. I have also taken into consideration Exhibits “A1” and “A2” tendered by CW1 and the written submissions of counsel.

The lone issue that arise for determination is “whether the claimant has proved his claim on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to his claim”.

CW1 the claimant has given evidence of how the DW1 the 1^st defendant was given a loan of N1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira) with the 2^nd defendant as his guarantor and tendered Exhibits “A1 and “A2 respectively. She has also given evidence that the 1^st defendant has not repaid the loan.

DW1, the 1^st defendant who was not represented by counsel has given evidence both in evidence in chief and cross examination admitting that he is owing the claimant the sum of N950,000.00 from the loans he took from the claimant’s Cooperative. DW1 has not denied that he has defaulted in paying back the loan he collected from the claimant. Evidence that is neither challenged nor rebutted remains good and credible which the court is enjoined to rely upon and ascribe probative value to it. See EBEINWE v STATE (supra).

Accordingly from the foregoing it is my view that the claimant has proved her case on the preponderance of evidence to be entitled to her claim.

Judgment is hereby entered in favour of the claimant on the following term(s):-

Court:

The defendants are to pay to the claimant the sum of N1,300,000.00 (One Million Three Hundred Thousand Naira) which the defendant collected from the claimant as loan.
The defendantsare to pay to the claimant the sum of N30,000.00 as cost.

Signed:

O. Amadi-Nna, Esq.

Chief Magistrate GD.II

15/5/2023

+23408132463315

Talk To Us

Quick Links

Get In Touch