Owerri –His Lordship, Hon. Justice Ibrahim Galadima of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, sitting in Owerri has dismissed the matter re-filed by the son of the late police officer Mr. Kingsley Enyinnaya against NIGERIA POLICE COUNCIL and four others for lack of credible evidence.
The court held that failure of the claimant to plead and prove the necessary material and precise sums alleged to be purportedly withheld by the defendants leaves same to the imagination and speculation and makes the cause irredeemably fatal.
On the14thday of February 2014, the initial claimant filed the suit and after his demise, a further and better-amended Complaint duly accompanied by other originating processes were filed on the 30th day of August, 2017, where Kingsley Enyinnaya (now Claimant) sought against Defendants for An order directing the respondents to forthwith release and effect the payment of all withheld salaries, gratuities and all rights due and accruing to Asp. Adolphus Andrew Enyinnaya in line with officers of his cadre from 2003 to his demise on 27th February 2014 to the applicant among others.
The Claimant was substituted for his late father (Asp. Adolphus Andrew Enyinnaya), the late ASP Enyinnaya was alleged police said to have risen through the ranks, from a police constable to corporal in 1980, to sergeant in 1982, Inspector and finally, Assistant Superintendent in 1993 and 1999.
In 2002, the claimant’s father was detained and charged for an offence, and as a result of his detention, his salaries and benefits were stopped by the Defendants.
That the late Enyinnaya was subsequently discharged from the charge, and despite being discharged, the defendants still failed to recall late Asp. Enyinnaya to duty in spite of his various entreaties to them before his unfortunate demise on 27/2/2014.
The Claimants’ Counsel in his final address formulated for determination whether the continuous withholding of the claimant’s salaries, benefits and other privileges by the defendants from the 8th October 2003 when he was discharged of the offense of murder to 27th day of February 2014 when he died is not unconstitutional, wrongful, illegal, null and void.
Counsel submitted that in view of the fact that the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 5th Defendants did not file any defence, the evidence supplied by the claimant in proof of their claims is unchallenged and ought to be accepted by the court as credible, argued that the deceased Enyinnaya was not guilty, he ought to have been reinstated and all outstanding salaries owed paid to him in compliance with Federal Services Rules.
The Attorney General of the Federation as 4thdefendant’s through their Counsel filed a final written address asked for a determination whether the claimant has in any way established any cause of action against the 4th defendant urged the court to strike out the 4th defendant as a party, and dismiss this suit in its entirety.
After careful evaluation of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides, the Court presided by Hon. Justice Ibrahim Galadima expressed thus;
“However, contrary to the submissions of the claimant’s Counsel, the non-challenge of this claimant’s evidence by the defendants does not automatically make his client entitled to the reliefs sought. The evidence on the record as adduced by the claimant must be examined in order to determine whether or not such evidence satisfy all applicable laws.
“Interestingly, in the entire statement of facts, there is no single averment stating how much the claimant’s father earned as salary before his salary was allegedly stopped, what he was entitled to as gratuity or in fact what his “other rights” purportedly withheld by the defendants, comprise of.
“There is no single evidence of salaries paid to him at any point in time while he was alive.
“Thus, it is my finding that the failure to plead and prove the necessary material and precise sums alleged to be purportedly withheld by the defendants, leaves same to the imagination and speculation by this court and this thus makes this claimant’s cause irredeemably fatal.
“Thus said, I find and hold that this claimant has failed to establish his reliefs by credible evidence. This cause is hereby dismissed in limine."