Stay current and updated
with our rich newsletter
VERTEX AGRO LTD V. IDRIS MARIGA NSHV/SD/46/2019
We are pleased to have represented Vertex Agro Limited in a N112,500,000.00 (One Hundred and Twelve Million, Five Hundred Thousand Naira) Only litigation before the Niger State High Court Coram; Ahmad Danladi J in Suit No: NSHC/SD/46/2019 against an obstinate debtor.
Facts of the case
The plaintiff is a manufacturer and supplier of Agrochemical products of which the defendant solicited for the supply of Agrochemical products on a credit basis for onward sale to third parties between the period of 2011-2019 on the condition that the defendant would remit payment for the product supplies instalment ally. However, the defendant failed to completely fulfil his part of the contract. On the 11th day of June, 2019, the plaintiff commenced an action against the defendant seeking relief to the tune of N114,329,850.00 as outstanding unpaid balance for the product supplies made. The plaintiff also pleaded details of the transaction and tendering ledger covering the entire period with all relevant details and evidence properly captured.
Decision of the court The Trial Court found for the Plaintiff on the strength of the overwhelming evidence demonstrated before the court which included an electronic video evidence despite the vehement opposition from the defence in the course of the trial. The decision expounded several interesting principles of law such as Admissibility of Statements by an illiterate made in English Language without the vernacular version, Scope of a reply on point of law, Effect of admission and several other principles of law.
Our Managing Partner, Michael Jonathan Numa Esq was lead counsel to Vertex Agro Limited (the biggest Distributor of Agro Chemical Product in Northern Nigeria) in this very important litigation.
This is a Banker-Customer dispute that commenced before the Federal Capital Territory High Court Coram: U.P Kekemeke.J wherein the claimant challenged the Post-No-Debit (PND) and/or Freezing Order placed on its account domiciled with the Bank without an Order of court. pleadings were filed and exchanged and the matter proceeded to trial.
Indeed Mr. Anuga for the 1st respondent and Mr. Numa for the 2nd respondent are the correct state of affairs in matters such as the one at hand and in the light of the prevailing circumstances well settled