JUSTICE Opeyemi Oke (Mrs) of the Lagos High Court, Igbosere, has entered judgement on suit No LD/1291/07 in favour of Reverend Ezekiel Iyiola Majadegbe (claimant) against Mr Daniel Wilson (defendant) by ordering the defendant to give up possession of three(3) bedroom flat with the appurtenances at block 65, plot 25, Abayomi Shonuga Street, Lekki, Lagos State on or before December 9, 2009.
In delivering the judgement on the said suit, the judge further ordered the defendant to pay mesne profit at the rate of N800,000 per annum from November 1, 2006 until possession is given up.  Besides, the court awarded the sum of N50, 000 as cost of the action in favour of the claimant as against the defendant.
Reverend Majadegbe had filed the suit against Mr Daniel Wilson, his tenant and in his writ of summons dated October 15, 2007, prayed  for the possession of the three(3) bedroom flat with appurtenances thereto in the building situate at block 65, plot 25 Abayomi  Shonuga  Street, Lekki, Lagos State.
He further prayed for mesne profit at the rate of N800,000 per annum from November 1, 2006 until possession is given up.  The claimant supported his claims with a 15- paragraph statement of claim dated October 15, 2007
On the other hand, the defendant failed or refused to file any defence or response to all the processes served on him.
Delivering the judgement, the judge said that she has carefully considered the claim before the court, the testimony of the only witness, perused the exhibits tendered, the submission of counsel to claimant and the authorities cited by him in his written address. She said that in all these, she identified only one issue for determination.
In considering the only issue, the judge posits that it is trite law that the standard of proof in civil cases are based on preponderance of evidence as against the standard of proof in civil cases which is proof beyond all reasonable doubt.
She added that the onus is on the claimant to prove the averments in his statement of claim. In likewise, the defendant is to prove the averments in his statement of defence.
She pointed out that “Proof of preponderance of evidence means that the evidence adduced by the claimant should be put on one side of an imaginary scale and the evidence adduced by the defendant on the other side of that scale to see which weighs better”
She noted that the defendant did not file any defence to the action, adding that the testimony of the claimant was unchallenged, uncontradicted,  so also the claim as set out in the statement of claim by the claimant and therefore the evidence before the court are deemed admitted by Mr Daniel Wilson.