IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
HOLDEN AT LAGOS
SUIT NO: FHC/L/CS/962/2011
BETWEEN:
EMIRATES (Trading as Emirates Airlines) …… APPELLANT/APPLICANT
AND
1. MR. HENRY OMATSOLA ARAGHO
2. MRS. ROSALINE AMAJU ARAGHO
3. MASTER HENRY UTSEORITSELAJU ARAGHO ... RESPONDENTS
((An infant) suing by his- next of friend
Mr. Henry Omatsola Aragho)
4. MR. EMMANUEL ORU
5. MRS. MAGDALENE ADA IKOMI-ORU
RESPONDENTS’ COUNTER AFFIDAVIT AGAINST THE APPLICANT’S MOTION ON NOTICE DATED 19TH JULY, 2012
I, Mr. Henry Omatsola Aragho, Male, Christian, Nigerian of 7th Floor NIPOST Building Lafiaji Obalende, Lagos, hereby make Oath and state as follows:
1. That I am the 1st Respondent in this Application and have attended every proceedings before the trial Court in this suit.
2. That I have the consent and authority of other Respondents to depose to this Counter Affidavit.
3. That by virtue of my position I am very familiar with all the facts herein deposed to.
4. That I have seen and read the Affidavit in support of the Applicant’s Motion on Notice dated 23rd July, 2012.
5. That the Depositions in the Applicant’s Affidavit in support of this Application are not correct.
6. That the Writ of Summons, the Statement of Claim and other frontloaded processes in this suit were filed at the Court below on the 12th day of August, 2011.
7. That after the Ruling of the Court below on the 14th May, 2012, which Ruling is the subject matter of this application, trial continued in this suit at the Court below.
8. That the parties concluded giving evidence in this Suit on 12th day of June, 2013 and the Court below adjourned to 3rd October, 2013 for adoption of Final Written Address.
9. That instead of the Applicant filing its Final Address as ordered by the Court, it brought an application dated 5th September, 2013 praying the Court to allow it recall it’s Witness to tender a document.
10. That the Application was opposed by my Counsel as a ploy to delay the proceedings and increase parties cost and waste the time of the Court.
11. That Ruling on that Application is adjourned to 1st November, 2013 .
12. That but for the attitude of the Applicant, this matter would have proceeded to Judgment at the Court below.
13. That the time of this Honourable Court will be saved where this Application is refused and the Applicant await the outcome of the Final Judgment of the Court below in this suit.
14. That I verily believe in the circumstance that the issue covered by the Appeal can be raised in the substantive Appeal were Judgment to go against the Appellant.
15. That I was informed by Monday Udoh Esq; Counsel in the Chambers of Layi Babatunde (SAN) & Co, the Respondents’ Counsel, on the 2nd day of October, 2013 at 3:00pm in the Chambers meeting to review this case and I verily believe him as follows:
(a) That the facts contained in the Applicant’s Affidavit in Support of this Application does not disclose any good and substantial reasons as envisaged by the Rules of this Honourable Court in explaining the delay.
(b) That where any of the parties is dissatisfied with the outcome of the Final Judgment in this suit, such a party can appeal against the Final Judgment in which the issue which is the subject matter of this Application can still be conveniently dealt with.
(c) That this Honourable Court in the circumstance being a very busy Court ought to be saved this interlocutory Appeal; the non hearing of which does no harm to the Applicant.
16. That this Appeal will occasion delay in the proceedings and increase our cost as Plaintiffs unnecessarily and avoidably.
17. That I verily believe that it is in the best interest of Justice that this Honourable Court refuse this Application.
18. That I depose to this Counter Affidavit in good faith and in accordance with the Oath Act.
HOLDEN AT LAGOS
SUIT NO: FHC/L/CS/962/2011
BETWEEN:
EMIRATES (Trading as Emirates Airlines) …… APPELLANT/APPLICANT
AND
1. MR. HENRY OMATSOLA ARAGHO
2. MRS. ROSALINE AMAJU ARAGHO
3. MASTER HENRY UTSEORITSELAJU ARAGHO ... RESPONDENTS
((An infant) suing by his- next of friend
Mr. Henry Omatsola Aragho)
4. MR. EMMANUEL ORU
5. MRS. MAGDALENE ADA IKOMI-ORU
RESPONDENTS’ COUNTER AFFIDAVIT AGAINST THE APPLICANT’S MOTION ON NOTICE DATED 19TH JULY, 2012
I, Mr. Henry Omatsola Aragho, Male, Christian, Nigerian of 7th Floor NIPOST Building Lafiaji Obalende, Lagos, hereby make Oath and state as follows:
1. That I am the 1st Respondent in this Application and have attended every proceedings before the trial Court in this suit.
2. That I have the consent and authority of other Respondents to depose to this Counter Affidavit.
3. That by virtue of my position I am very familiar with all the facts herein deposed to.
4. That I have seen and read the Affidavit in support of the Applicant’s Motion on Notice dated 23rd July, 2012.
5. That the Depositions in the Applicant’s Affidavit in support of this Application are not correct.
6. That the Writ of Summons, the Statement of Claim and other frontloaded processes in this suit were filed at the Court below on the 12th day of August, 2011.
7. That after the Ruling of the Court below on the 14th May, 2012, which Ruling is the subject matter of this application, trial continued in this suit at the Court below.
8. That the parties concluded giving evidence in this Suit on 12th day of June, 2013 and the Court below adjourned to 3rd October, 2013 for adoption of Final Written Address.
9. That instead of the Applicant filing its Final Address as ordered by the Court, it brought an application dated 5th September, 2013 praying the Court to allow it recall it’s Witness to tender a document.
10. That the Application was opposed by my Counsel as a ploy to delay the proceedings and increase parties cost and waste the time of the Court.
11. That Ruling on that Application is adjourned to 1st November, 2013 .
12. That but for the attitude of the Applicant, this matter would have proceeded to Judgment at the Court below.
13. That the time of this Honourable Court will be saved where this Application is refused and the Applicant await the outcome of the Final Judgment of the Court below in this suit.
14. That I verily believe in the circumstance that the issue covered by the Appeal can be raised in the substantive Appeal were Judgment to go against the Appellant.
15. That I was informed by Monday Udoh Esq; Counsel in the Chambers of Layi Babatunde (SAN) & Co, the Respondents’ Counsel, on the 2nd day of October, 2013 at 3:00pm in the Chambers meeting to review this case and I verily believe him as follows:
(a) That the facts contained in the Applicant’s Affidavit in Support of this Application does not disclose any good and substantial reasons as envisaged by the Rules of this Honourable Court in explaining the delay.
(b) That where any of the parties is dissatisfied with the outcome of the Final Judgment in this suit, such a party can appeal against the Final Judgment in which the issue which is the subject matter of this Application can still be conveniently dealt with.
(c) That this Honourable Court in the circumstance being a very busy Court ought to be saved this interlocutory Appeal; the non hearing of which does no harm to the Applicant.
16. That this Appeal will occasion delay in the proceedings and increase our cost as Plaintiffs unnecessarily and avoidably.
17. That I verily believe that it is in the best interest of Justice that this Honourable Court refuse this Application.
18. That I depose to this Counter Affidavit in good faith and in accordance with the Oath Act.
No comments:
Post a Comment