ATTAH & ORS V. NNACHO & ORS

• Pages: 222-227

222



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1964] N.S.C.C.

ATTAH & ORS V. NNACHO & ORS

EDWARD ATTAH & ORS (for

themselves and on behalf of

NNADI-NSUGBE people)

V

OBI CHUKWURAH NNACHO & ORS

(for themselves and on behalf of

AMUMU-NSUGBE people)

SUIT NO. FSC 256/1963



15

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

BRETT,



J.S.C.

COKER,



J.S.C.

IDIGBE,



J.S.C.

23rd October, 1964.



20

Remedies - Damages - Defendants sued in trespass as representing community -

Award.

Civil Action - Practice and Procedure - Consolidation of suits - pleadings complete



25

in one, not in the other - Trial without objection - Area of land in dispute

- Pleadings and plan - Injunction against community, with exception of certain

persons.

Torts - Trespass - Defendants sued as representing community - Damages.



30

ISSUES:

1.

Can a plaintiff complain on appeal that a miscarriage of justice resulted from

the defendant's failure to file a defence at the trial, where he did not object at

the trial?



35

2.

Can an injunction be awarded against a whole community where several

persons are sued on behalf of the community?

FACTS:

In Suit A, the Amumus (the respondents) alleged that their ancestors gave the

Nnadis (the appellants) the land edged green on their plan, and sued the Nnadis



40

about the pink area. The Nnadis later in Suit B sued the Amumus claiming a large

portion of the pink area (over and above the green). The suits were consolidated.

Pleadings were filed by both sides in Suit A, in suit B the Nnadis filed a statement

of claim, but the Amumus did not file a defence. Thus stood the pleadings at the

trial; the Nnadis did not raise any question about the Amumus not filing a defence



45

in Suit B. At the trial the Amumus were treated as the plaintiffs. In Suit A the Nnadis

in their defence alleged that the area in dispute was, by reference to their own plan,

the green area and a part of the pink, but elsewhere in their defence,they claimed

ownership of the land in dispute and denied the Amumus' claim to the pink area

on the Amumus' plan. The High Court awarded the Amumus title to the pink area,



50

damages and an injunction.

5

APPELLANTS

10

RESPONDENTS