together with independent surveyors boarded the vessel and confirmed the volume of AGO supplied. Shell subsequently acknowledged receipt of the AGO and the quantity thereof. 15. He continued his testimony by stating that Mr. Ifeanyi Paddy Eke, the representative of Blackberry Nigeria Lid later came to Lagos for reconciliation of account. The amount due to Petrostar Nigeria Ltd was Four Hundred and Eighty-Five Million Naira supplied. Shell paid Blackberry but Eventually, only 230 Million Naira was leaving a balance of 255 Million Naira. for they paid Mr. the five million litres AGO refused to pay Petrostar. by Blackberry to Petrostar, Paddy Eke issued a lot of cheques but they were all dishonoured; he then pleaded for an extension of time for him to settle the debt. Mr. Paddy Eke, acting on behalf of Blackberry entered into an agreement with Petrostar to pay the outstanding amount within 90 days from the date of the agreement. 16. PW1 went further to say that on the strength of the agreement made between Petrostar and Blackberry acting through Mr. Paddy Eke, a post dated cheque for the outstanding amount was issued to Petrostar. On the maturity date of the cheque, it was presented for payment but it was dishonoured due to lack of funds in the account. A letter was written to Mr. Paddy Eke to inform him of the dishonoured cheque. 17. PW1 also intimated to the Court that that was entered into between Petrostar made under duress but freely written identified copies of the agreement and outstanding sum of Two Hundred and he was a signatory to the agreement and Blackberry and that it was not by Mr. Paddy Eke himself. He the cheque that was issued for the Fifty-Five Million Naira and they were tendered in evidence by learned counsel to the plaintiff, Exhibits Al and A2 respectively. 18. Plaintiffs second witness (PW2), Mr. Ndubisi Ekem Mbaanugo is a Chartered Accountant with thirty-four years experience. He stated that he prepared a report on the interest accruing on the amount of indebtedness of 255 Million Naira from August 2007 to December 2010 at the request of his client, the plaintiff herein. He continued that he received the request by letter 6