CELL TEL LIMITED vs. INTER IDEAL LIMITED

This is an application for an order relisting an appeal struck out by this Court on the 18th January 2006. In urging the Court to grant the order, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the record was voluminous; the sum awarded was huge and that since the order barring the applicant from being appointed a Director for 4 years was draconian there was need for this Court to allow the application for the merits of the appeal to be gone into. In opposition, learned counsel for the respondent urged that contrary to assertions of learned counsel that he was not involved in the trial at the High Court, he indeed represented the applicant, declined to offer any evidence in his defence; and did not file any written address. According to counsel, the present application was a ploy to frustrate the respondent; since the applicant was in the habit of filing applications and thereafter going to sleep. Learned counsel argued that even though the Court below stayed execution of its ow...