32. The testimony of PW4 is to the effect that he introduced second defendant to plaintiff whereupon the parties entered into a contract for the supply of AGO to SPDC. He said he was contacted when the second defendant failed to pay the contract sum to the plaintiff. He further stated that part of the contract sum, about 200 Million Naira was paid to the plaintiff He continued by saying that a contract (Exhibit Al) was subsequently entered into by the parties by which the outstanding balance was to be paid but the cheque issued to plaintiff for the outstanding sum was returned unpaid. The plaintiff then instituted this action. 33. Defendants in their statement of defence did not deny that they owed the plaintiff. Defendants’ contention is that plaintiffs by their conduct have frustrated their efforts in settling their indebtedness to them. The defendants pleaded frustration as a defence and therefore bore the burden of proof in establishing that plaintiff frustrated their efforts in settling their indebtedness to them. After ail, it is a cardinal principie of law that he who alleges must prove. The defendants failed to discharge this burden as they failed to produce any evidence to substantiate that claim. 34. Further, defendants contended that they entered into the agreement (Exhibit Al) on which this suit is grounded under threat and undue influence. Defendants further contended that they did not have the benefit of having their solicitor perusing the agreement before it was signed. Having made allegations of threat and undue influence, the defendants bore the burden of proof which they ought to discharge by adducing evidence to support same. However, defendants failed to adduce evidence to prove that they entered into the contract (Exhibit Al) under threat and undue influence. A voluntary agreement entered into by a person of full capacity is binding whether he consults with his solicitor or not. Therefore, the fact that defendants did not have the benefit of their solicitor when they entered into the agreement (Exhibit Al) with the plaintiff is of no legal value or consequence. 35. The evidence of PWI and PW4 stood uncontroverted despite the fact that defendants’ counsel was given every reasonable opportunity to cross 14