In the case of Newswatch Communications Limited v. Alhaji Aliyu Ibrahim Atta (2006) 12 NWLR (Pt. 993) 144 at 181 182, per Mahmud Mohammed, JSC (as he then was), the Supreme Court held, concerning the concept of fair hearing as follows: There is no doubt at all that the principles of fair hearing is fundamental to all Court procedure and proceedings. Like jurisdiction, the absence of it vitiates proceedings however well conducted. See Salu v. Egeibon (1994) 6 NWLR (Pt.348) 23 at 40; Ceekay Traders Ltd. v. G.M. Company Ltd. 15 (1992) 2 NWLR (Pt. 222) 132 and Atano v. A.G., Bendel State (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt. 75) 201. Fair hearing according to the law envisages that both parties to a case be given opportunity of presenting their respective cases without let or hindrance from the beginning to the end. See Ekpeto v. Wanogho (2004) 18 NWLR (Pt. 905) 394 at 411. Fair hearing in accordance with the law also envisages that the Court or tribunal hearing the parties case, should be fair and impartial without it showing any degree of bias against any of the parties. See Nwafor Elike v. Nwakwoala & Ors. (1984) 12 S.C. 301 and Isiyaku Mohammed v. Kano N.A. (1968) 1 All NLR 424. Therefore, a denial of a party of his right to be heard is a breach of his constitutional right as enshrined in Section 36(6)(b) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and a breach of natural justice. See Otapo v. Sunmonu (1987) 2 NWLR (Pt. 58) 587 and State v. Onagoruwa (1992) 2 NWLR (Pt. 221) 33. Where however, a party decided to indulge in delays, as in this case, he cannot be heard complaining of denial of his right to fair hearing. 16 See Mohammed v. Kano Native Authority (1968) 1 All NLR 424 and Okoduwa v. State (1988) 2 NWLR (Pt. 73) 333.