It is indeed trite that originating summons is a method of commencement of proceedings where proceedings are not contentious and are meant to determine short questions of law. It is not to be used where facts are in dispute.
See MRS JOY NKEIRUKA ESEZOOBO V NIGERIA SOCIAL INSURANCE TRUST FUND MANAGEMENT BOARD AND ORS 2012 LPELR 9282 (CA).
However, where facts are alleged to be in contention the dispute must be substantial. In OLUJIMI V ESHA (2009) 11 NWLR PT 1153 PAGE 464 AT 482, Nweze JCA (as he then was)held that a substantial dispute means a real dispute or controversy of considerable importance as opposed to an imaginary dispute or controversy.
Accordingly, I have perused the affidavits andcounter affidavit of the parties in this suit and thereliefs sought. I honestly do not find any real controversy between the facts presented by the parties that require the call for pleadings. I therefore answer this issue in favour of the Plaintiff against the Defendant.
In any event assuming, but without conceding that this suit is a contentions one and ought not to have been commenced by originating summons, the proper thing for the court to do is to order parties to file pleadings and not to strike out the suit. See OLUJIMI V ESHA (supra). See CHIEF P.A JIDEONWO & ORS V MRS EUNICE CHUKWUMA 2010 LPELR – 4355 (CA) per Augie JCA (as she then was) at 21 – 22 paragraph A-E; ABDULSALAM AWEDA OKANLA & ORS V MALLAM ABUBAKAR BABA ALAFIN 2017 LPELR 42003 (CA).