The Appellant instituted a suit against the Respondent claiming among other reliefs a declaration that the Respondent was in breach of the terms of contract entered between them and should pay compensation for the damages suffered and other costs. The High Court, held that the defendant was not in any breach of the terms of the contract as contended by the Appellant. However, the Court ordered the Respondent to fulfil her obligations of processing certificate of title in the names of the parties in accordance with the agreed ratio of shares that is, 75 percent for the Appellant and 25 percent for the Respondent. Additionally, each party was ordered to bear its own costs. The decision of the trial Court aggrieved the Appellant, who preferred an appeal to this Court challenging it.
The Court suo motu inquired if the proceedings of the High Court were proper. The question was attributed by the fact that this matter was handled by more than one Judge. Nevertheless, the proceedings appeared to suggest that, the procedure pertaining to exchange of a case file among the Judges was not observed.