Issues: On issue No.2, the appellant contended that the appellant’s residence was to be painted free but the respondent claimed that the cost of painting it was N250,000.00 (two hundred and fifty thousand naira).

The appellant’s counsel then submitted that there cannot be a valid contract where the parties differ on the essential terms of the contract as it was held in J adesimi v. Egbe (2003) 10 NWLR (Pt. 827) 1 at 30 and Onyenma v. Amah (1988).

The respondent’s counsel, Mr. Osutuk, in the brief, argued issues 1 and 2 together and issue 3 separately. He submitted that the parties were ad idem as to the terms of the contract, the type of paint, the buildings to be painted and the amount, namely N250,OOO.00 (two hundred and fIfty thousand A naira) for the residence of the appellant and N 150,000.00 (one hundred and fifty thousand naira) for the church offices and fence making it a total of N400,000.00 (four hundred thousand naira). Counsel referred to Archtech

E. Claopa v. O.A. U. (1997) Vol. 5 1 LRCN 1598 at 1603; Alfotrin Ltd v. Attornf4Y General Federation & Anor. (1996) 9 NWLR (Pt. 475) 634, B (1996) Vol. 44 LRCN 2376 at 2381 and Yadis (Nigeria) Limited v. Great Nigeria Insurance Company Limited (2007) All FWLR (Pt. 370) 1348 .

On issue No.3, respondent’s counsel submitted that from exhibit 3, tendered by the appellant, the trial court arrived atN260,OOO.00 (two hundred and sixty thousand naira), as the balance payment due to the respondent. Counsel submitted also that a court has no authority to award more than what is claimed although it may award less.

He relied on J eric (Nig.) Ltd v. Union Bank of(Nig.) Plc (2000) 82 LRCN 3259 at 3265; Ekpenyong v. Nyong (1975) 2 SC 71; Obioma v. Olomu (1978) 3 SC 1; Okechukwu v. Onuorah(2000) 82LRCN3300 at 3304-5, (2001) FWLR (Pt. 33) 219 and D Yadis (Nig.) Ltd v. Great (Nig.) Insurance.

I have carefully examined the issues for determination formulated by the parties and in my considered view they are like two sides of the same coin and they can be conveniently taken together.

The central issue in contention is whether there was a valid contract between the parties. For a contract to come into being in law, there must be a definite offer, by the offeror and a definite acceptance by the offeree and of course a legal consideration.

In otherwords, for a contract to exist, there must be an offer, unqualified acceptance of that offer and a legal consideration. There must be a mutuality of purpose and an intention. The two contracting F parties must agree. Dahiru v. Kamale (2001) FWLR (Pt. 62) 1853, (2005)

9 NWLR (Pt. 929) 8 at 50; Tsokwa Motors (Nig.) Ltd v. Union Bank of Nigeria Ltd (1996) 9 NWLR (Pt. 471) 129; NekaB.B.B. Manufacturing Co. Ltd v. African Continental Bank Ltd (2004) All FWLR (Pt. 198) 1175, (2004) 2NWLR (Pt. 858) 521.

An offer is an expression of readiness to contract on terms specified by the offeror which if accepted by the offeree will give rise to a binding contract. It is by acceptance that the offer is converted into a contract. Sparkling Breweries Ltd v. u.B.N. Ltd (2001) FWLR (Pt. 71) 1682, (2001)

15 NWLR(Pt. 737) 539; UBNv. Sax (Nig.) Ltd(1994) 8 NWLR(Pt. 361) H 150 and Omega Rank (Nig.) Plc v. OB. C Ltd (2005) All FWLR (Pt. 249) 1964, (2005) 8 NWLR(Pt. 928) 547.

No written agreement was tendered by the parties before the trial. A court. That means that the agreement was oral. An agreement can be oral or inferred from the conduct of the parties: Trade Bank Pic v. Dele M orenikeji (Nig.) Ltd (2005) 6 NWLR (Pt. 921) 309 . Notwithstanding the fact that the contract is oral, it is enforceable.

From the respondent’s statement of claim, at pages 3 – 5 of the record, particularly paragraphs 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and his evidence in chief, it is clear that there was an offer made by the appellant to the respondent to paint the appellant’s residence at Mbiambong, Etoi, Uyo, the power chapel church offices and the church fence at No. 98 NwanibaRoad, Uyo. The parties discussed the colour to be used and agreed on the text cote paint manufactured by the respondent.