While the Plaintiff on the other hand raised one issue for determination to wit:“Whether the Plaintiff herein has made out his case upon the balance of probabilities and is entitled to the reliefs sought” sought” 1st Defendant Counsel submitted that it is settled law that he that asserts must prove in order to succeed in his claim. Isegbkun V. Adelaki (2003) 2 NWLR (part 1337) p. 165, paragraphs G – H. Counsel submitted further that it is settled law that an unchallenged, uncontroverted averment stands admitted and will be taken as the true state of affairs. He cited the case of Salzgitter Stah (Gmbh) V. Tunji Dosunmu Industrial Ltd (2010) 42 (part 2 NSCQR 1085 at p. 1109, Per C. M Chukwuma – Eneh, Jsc. Counsel further submitted that the Plaintiff had ample opportunity to cross examine the 1st Defendant’s witness and produce documents in rebuttal of 1st Defendant’s claim and assertions, but has failed to do so, i.e. to shake / dislodge the facts placed before the Court by the Defendant. He referred the Court to the case of Omodele Ashabieya And 2ors V. Alhaji Risikatu Lopade & 1or (2011) 11 NWLR (part 1259) page 505 at 534 paragraphs C – D, the supreme Court held as follows:“Where a party fails to adduce evidence in support of any assertion in his pleading he is deemed to have abandoned his pleading on the fact”. Again Counsel submitted that the Plaintiff has been unable to discharge the burden of proof placed on him. On right to comment on documents before the Court, counsel submitted that parties to a suit have all the right to comment on documents already in evidence before the Court. He stated that this position of law was restated by the supreme Court in the case of General Muhammadu Buhari V. Independent National Electoral Commission & 4ors (2008) 19 NWLR (part 1120) page 246 at page 392 paragraphs E – H, thus:“Counsel on all sides are free to comment comment on documents which had been tendered in evidence, including drawing inferences and conclusions at the address stage”. 4