Jos North Local Government Council V Alhaji Baba Akawu and Fatima Akawu; Matter Adjourned to October 29-2026 For Ruling.
By Peter Azi – Jos
A high Judge of Plateau State,Justice C.Domlong of Court 17, Adjourned Ruling of Preliminary objections raised by the Counsels to the Applicants, who seek to join on the matter, raised a preliminary Objection.
Chief Garba Pwul,SAN Counsel to the Applicants in an Application filled by HRH,Ada Emmanuel Ajik, Adagwom Jos Izere Chiefdom and Ada Chiroma Itsegok, on behalf of Jos Izere Chiefdom and Afizere Nation,informs the Court that,he objects the appearances of the first and Second Respondents Counsels.
This is an application filled in a matter initiated in this Court,by originating summon by Alhaji Baba Akawu and Fatima Akawu, were claimants and it is a continuation of that same matter.
The Learned Silk, contended that people announcing their appearances were not in the matter and therefore,they are strangers completely on this matter.
He further cited order 52 rule 1and order 53 rule 2 of the Plateau State High Court Civil Procedure rules(2020).
The Counsels can only appeared in Compliance with order 52 and 53 of the said procedures.
Chief Pwul,further averred that Rules of Courts are meant to be obeyed.
I therefore,urge my Lord to discontinuance them on this matter.
Canvasssing His arguments before the Court,Counsel to the Ujah of Anaguta,HRH Joro Magaji II and Anaguta Development Association,Chief G.M Kuttu, SAN,joined his forces with Chief Garba Pwul, SAN, said we do agreed that the Judgement was entered but our applications have revived the matter with the same suit number.
We were served under one Counsel.
He further reiterated order 52 is very clear and that if there is non obedience to the Rules of Court,there must be consequences and it does not stop at the appearances alone but goes to the roots of the matter.
Cited Appeal Court case in Atoyebi V. Ayeloye 2021.
Rules of Court is a Compass.
Urge them to withdraw their appearances and processes for today.
And we cannot choose what to obey.
In his Submission, Edward Pwajok,(SAN) who appeared with Gyang Zi (SAN) on behalf of Da. Emmanuel Pam; the Acting Gwom Rwei of Kabong, expresses their alignments to the submission of the two senior learned Counsels to the applicants and we had earlier filled our objections and is beyond appearances.
James Okafor Counsel to Jos North Local Government Council, the Applicant associate itself to the objection of the appearances of the counsel to the respondents.
We also relied on order 52 of the rules of this Court, which is unequivocally clear and the only way a different Counsel can take over is by filling for the change of Counsel, which has not been done in this case and they have not.We also submit that if the counsel to the former claimants are to appear to this matter of today,they can only be on the same team. Even though, judgement was given in default. It is the same case and the matter is still alive and they are core claimants hence, cannot appear separately.
Cited the Supreme Court case of Fadayomi V. Shadikpe.
Isiaku M. Dikko,Counsel to the first respondent expresses his surprise to the respective applicants Counsels, protest against their appearances.
Said is uncalled for.
And the application is made by the parties who are not sure if they will be proper before His Lordship.
He cited order 22 rule 12 of the High Court rules and the judgement enjoys the status of validity and finality.
Said the order 52 is to protect the litigants.
The Learned Counsel cited the case of Court of Appeal in Engineer Edegbo Omaye V. Federal Ministry of Mines, Housing,Urban Development and Ors.
All Purpose Shelter Ltd V. Dennis.
Making his own submission, Counsel to the 2nd respondent,Y.A H. Ruba(SAN) cited the case of Isa V. Adamu and Ors,Order 43 of the High Court rules of Plateau State and Section 37 of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria,1999(As Amended) respondents have right to engage any legal practitioner of their choice.
I urge His Lordship to discontinuance their applications.
Replying on point of Law,Chief Garba Pwul averred that order 43 is not relevant and is too late to rely on order 43,even if I’m in breach of order 43, reliance on the Constitutional rights on choice of Counsel,it is trite and nobody can take it away.
It must be in compliance with the rules of Court, which is order 52 and rules of Courts are meant to achieve orderliness.
Chief Kuttu maintained that the respondents Counsels are still at the door side seeking to enter through the window,while there are burglaries and we are asking them to come through the door.
Court Matters and processes are not ambush or Gorrila warfare.
Edward Pwajok (SAN) also responded and relied on order 52 Rule 2 of the Plateau State High Court Rules,our application is on Jurisdiction not on the issue of Fontus officio, my Lord even area Courts equally have their own rules and they must be obeyed. He equally cited the Case of Fadayomi V. Shadepe to further canvases his arguments.
J.M Okafor similarly cited Fadeyemi V. Shadepe Supra.
Said order 22 Rule 12 cited by Y.A.H Ruba,is not related to the present matter,default judgement is final where there is no room for changes while in default judgement,there is room for changes.
Having listened to all the arguments by the Counsels.
The matter was adjourned to October 29-2026,For Ruling on the Preliminary Objections.
- Advertisement -
(DEMOCRACY NEWSLINE NEWSPAPER, JULY 11TH 2026)
