"...The Appellant had no further duty to establish the account to be attached in the order nisi and it was the Respondent (garnishee) that had a duty to react to the account designated and show cause. I agree with the Appellant that by Section 83 of the Sheriffs and Civil Process Act, the burden has shifted on the garnishee to show cause. See also TOTAL UPSTREAM NIGERIA LTD v. A.I.C. LIMITED (2015) LPELR-25388 (CA) where this Court held: "In OCEANIC BANK PLC v. OLADEPO (2012) LPELR-19670 (CA) this Court held inter alia that it is not the business of a garnishee to undertake to pray the role of an advocate for a judgment debtor by trying to shield and protect the money of the judgment debtor.

In SKYE BANK PLC v. DAVID & ORS (2014) LPELR-23731(CA) this Court reaffirmed its decision in Oceanic Bank's case. In the circumstances it needs be emphasized that it is not the duty of a Garnishee to defend the judgment debt sought to be enforced against the judgment debtor. The duty of the Garnishee upon receipt of Garnishee order nisi is to file before the Court an affidavit to show cause why the judgment debtor's money in his custody should not be attached to satisfy the judgment debt. It then behoves a garnishee to present the true state of affairs regarding the monies before the Court. Either there is no or sufficient fund in his custody or that the available fund is under lien or assigned to a third party in which case the Court instead of proceeding to make the order for garnishee absolute may order that any issue or question necessary for the determining his liability be tried or determined as provided for in Section 87 of the Sheriff and Civil Process Act."

Per NIMPAR, J.C.A. IN IHEAKAM v. FBN CITATION: (2017) LPELR-43545(CA)