UMOREN, J.C.A.(Delivering the Leading Judgment): The appellant, in an election petition which was subsequently amended questioned the election of the 1st respondent (who was also the 1st respondent in the tribunal below) on the grounds stated in paragraph 16 of the amended petition, that is to say, that he scored the highest number of valid and lawful votes cast at the election and ought to have been returned.
The amended petition is at pages 1 - 5 of the record of proceedings. The replies of the 1st and 2nd - 4th respondents are at pages 9 - 10 and 12 and 13 of the record. There was the petitioner's reply to 1st respondent's objection to votes at page 14 of the record.
The lower tribunal after hearing evidence led by the petitioner and his witness and the respondents resting their case on that of the petitioner and the addresses of learned counsel for the parties, refused in its judgment at pages 32 - 57 to avoid or nullify the results of the polling units affected and consequently …