Concerning the grounds of appeal, it was found that the respondent failed to enter appearance to file a defense, thus the interlocutory judgment was valid. As such, it was found that it was erroneous for the trail judge to allow the respondents participate in the proceedings and still allow him to cross-examine the appellant and his witnesses on matters to which no defense had been filed. Therefore, the respondent had breached contract, which lead to entering into an interlocutory judgment.

Concerning the issue of quantum of damages, it was found that the appellant had proved both special and general damages, and was entitled to the proved damages accordingly.

The court however, found no basis for retrial as there was no mistrial of the suit.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed to that extent, the judgment of the learned trial judge was thereby set aside.