QUEEN V. NWANKWO

• Pages: 47-53

QUEEN V. NWANKWO



47

laration of title presents special features as regards the defence of judgment re-

covered, and I would uphold the grant of a declaration in this case on the ground

that it was made by reference to a plan, which the declaration of the native court

was not, and thus adds somethinc; to the original declaration. On the evidence,

5



the trespass was a continuing one and I would not disturb the award of damages

or of the injunction.

After the appeal had been adjourned for judgment, it was observed that the

plaintiff's plan, Exhibit A, had not been countersigned by the Director of Surveys,

as required by s.23 of the Survey Act. This section is mandatory and the court is

10



obliged to take the point of its own motion. As, however, the plan was filed in May

1955, when ignorance of s.23 of the survey Act was general, I would follow the

course adopted in a number of previous appeals by re-opening the appeal and

adjourning it for six weeks to give the plaintiffs the opportunity of having their plan

countersigned and filing a motion to produce it as additional evidence. If this is

15



done and the motion is granted I would dismiss the appeal with costs assesssed

at 25 guineas.

TAYLOR, F.J.: I concur.

BAIRAMIAN, F.J.:. I concur.

Appeal dismissed.

QUEEN V. NWANKWO

THE QUEEN



RESPONDENT

V

UGWU NWANKWO



APPELLANT

30





SUIT NO. FSC 244/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT

BRETT,



F.J.

TAYLOR,



F.J.

BAIRAMIAN,



F.J.

35



2nd February. 1962.

Criminal Law - Pleading - Duplici4 - Criminal Procedure Act Cap. 43, Sections

152(2), 152(4), 156 - Fraudulent conversion - Charge of stealing a gross sum

made up of known items - Not bad for duplicity - Amplification of charge

40



where necessary - Counts of general deficiency of money.

ISSUE:

1. Whether a court in a criminal charge which has to do with conversion of a gross

sum made up of various other known sums of money, is bad for duplicity.

45 FACTS:

The appellant, a clerk in a district Council, collected rates for which he issued

receipts. He paid the collections into the treasury in aggregate sums from time to

time, for which he obtained receipts and these he pasted in his cash book. The

Auditor later found out there were no treasury receipts to account for rates col-

50



lected in three receipts books and a check at the treasury showed that those col-

lections had not been paid in. The appellant admitted collecting the money. His

defence during trial was that he pasted the treasury receipts in two books taken

away by the police which had disappeared. He was convicted on 3 counts of

stealing. He appealed on the ground that the counts were bad for duplicity con-

20

25