IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA
IN THE KANO JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT KANO
Before His Lordship:-
HON. JUSTICE E.D. E ISELE - JUDGE
DATE: 24th JUNE, 2019 - SUIT NO. NICN/KN/43/2016
ISMAILA ABDULLAHI - CLAIMANT
ISA KAITA COLLEGE OF EDUCATION DUTSIN-MA KATSINA ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DEFENDANT
REPRESENTATIONS: Claimant Present. Defendant Present.
Ibrahim Adamu, Esq for the Claimant.
Abdul Aliyu, Esq. for the Defendant.
At this stage of the proceedings the court is mainly concerned with relevancy for the purpose of admitting evidence before it and no more. And I hold that the requirement of admissibility is met by the claimant in this regard. The Defendant on the other hand has referred to the noncompliance with the provisions of S. 104 of the Evidence Act. These provisions I hold border on the weight to be attached to the documents objected to.
Section 14 and 15 of Evidence Act have not been ousted by the provision of S. 104. S. 14 provides for Evidence obtained in properly or in contravention of a Law (in this case S. 104 (2)) of the Evidence Act that it shall be admissible unless the court is of the opinion that the desirability of admitting the evidence is outweighed by the undesirability of admitting the evidence. Here I hold that the desirability of admitting the evidence outweighs the need not to admit them. I have heard the claimant give notice to the Defendant to produce his secret file in the Defendants custody where perhaps the (original Copies may be) but the Defendant has not complied. The provisions of order 34 rules 2 (1) and (2) of the same in conjunction with Rules 1 & 2 of the same order does show that the claimant have themselves not fully complied with the provisions as well as the Defendant thought the subpoena the court of 6th March, 2018 in the case file is yet to be fully played out before the court. The objection of the Defendant is however over ruled for the reason given earlier. The Defendant may wish to cross examine further on the documents and address the court further on the weight to be attached to them over noncompliance with S. 104 of Evidence Act.
The following documents are hereby admitted in evidence.
Exhibits A is the Provisional Offer of Appointment dated 13/03/2007
Exhibits A1 is the Approval for Confirmation Letter dated 14th April, 2009
Exhibits A2 is the Notification of Promotion dated 14th March, 2012.
Exhibit A3 is the Inter Departmental Transfer dated 5th October, 2012.
Exhibit A4 is the Termination of Appointment dated 10th September, 2014.
Exhibit A5 is the letter headed:
Re: Appeal Letter In Respect of Termination of Appointment dated 4th December, 2014
Exhibit B is the Pay Slip of 8/17/2017
Exhibit C the Copy of the Letter of Lawal Amah & Co. dated 19th February, 2015. Headed Re: Termination of Appointment of Ismaila Abdullahi
Exhibit C1 is the Letter headed Appealing Letter In Respect of Termination of Appointment.
Exhibit C2 is the Letter dated 18th March, 2015 headed Re: Termination of Appointment of Ismaila Abdullahi Letter of Request.
Exhibit C3 is the Writ of Summons
Exhibit C4 is the Calculations headed. Payment of Retirement Benefits (Gratuity & Pension) Calculated in Accordance with Federal Circulars FD 4 & 7 1992.
Case is adjourned to the 10th day of October, 2019 for Cross Examination.
Ruling is entered accordingly.
HON. JUSTICE E. D. E. ISELE