Where a party (Defendant) took no part in a proceeding or offered no evidence in his defence as in the case at hand, the evidence before the court goes one way and there would be nothing on the other side of the imaginary scale or balance against the evidence of the (plaintiff) or other party. [OGUNJUMO V ADERMOLU (1995) 4 NWLR (Pt. 389) 245 and NWABUOKU V OTTIH (1961) 2 SCNLR 232 referred to] Furthermore Sections 141, 142 and 143 of the Evidence Act states as follows on who has the burden of proof in particular cases. Section 141 (1) of The Act states as follows: (1) (2) Whoever desires any court to give judgment as to any legal right or liability dependent on the existence of facts which he asserts must prove that those facts exists. When a person is bound to prove the existence of any fact, it is said that the burden of proof lies on that person. Section 142 of the same Act further provides that: “The burden of proof in a suit or proceeding lies on the person who would fail if no evidence at all were given on either side.” Section 143(2) provides that: “If such party adduces evidence which ought reasonably to satisfy the court that the fact sought to be proved is established, the burden lies on the party against whom judgment would be given if no more evidence were adduced, and so on successively until all the issues in the pleadings have been dealt with.” CA – JUDGMENT MATTY FAYE V DAWDA JAWARA Page 14