had authority to collect money from the DW2 Chibuiheuko to execute project for the 2nd Defendant, and he answer yes. Again in paragraph 1 (u) of the witness statement on oath of the DW3, he asserted “that on the 7th day of June, 2008, the 2nd Defendant gave the Plaintiff through its accountant Chibuiheraiwe (Nee Ukoh) the sum of USD$ 200,000 to change and pay to the 1st Defendant the sum of N29, 400,000.00 only as additional payment for the 6 no shops which the Plaintiff only paid as agent of the 2nd Defendant and submitted the tellers to the 1st Defendant on behalf of the 2nd Defendant and receipt no1389 was issued to the 2nd Defendant. He further submitted that under cross examination by the Plaintiff counsel, the DW3 stated that the receipt of payment of the shops from EFAB property brought back in the name of the company as an acknowledgment of payment is the evidence to show that Plaintiff collected money. PW1 under cross examination by 1st Defendant counsel as to why PW1, paid the sum of N29,400,000.00 to the 1st Defendant without collecting receipt, PW1 in answer stated that “yes, but I have the deposit slips. EFAB issued receipt to Mrs. Attang but not me. They are to go and sought it out with her that is 1st Defendant.” it is submitted that the Plaintiff has admitted that after the deposit of the additional payment for the shops, the 1st Defendant issued receipt to the knowledge of the Plaintiff which receipt he forwarded to the 2nd Defendant. It is submitted that this is an admission against interest. He referred the Court to section 20 Evidence Act. In addition, counsel submitted that it is a fact not in dispute to state that the PW1 was an agent of the 2nd Defendant in the process leading to the purchase of the 6 no shops in view of the admission of the PW1 that he had on several occasions collected money from the Attang family to purchase items on their behalf. Of particular importance is the fact that the PW1 had on several instances done so through his account as per Exhibit DB14 and the payment thereof. Also, in the process leading to the incorporation of the 2nd Defendant, PW1 equally admitted under cross examination that he received money from DW3 through his account to pay the lawyer that incorporated same. All the receipts issued to the PW1 for the transactions done on behalf of the 2nd Defendant were dutifully submitted to the 2nd Defendant. Similarly, Exhibit HB1 also show that PW1 is and had always been the agent of the 2nd Defendant, and that his 10