OKIUGBEDI EDJEKPO & 2 ORS V IBOYI ITHIBRI OSIA & 3 ORS - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

OKIUGBEDI EDJEKPO & 2 ORS V IBOYI ITHIBRI OSIA & 3 ORS

AMINU MOHAMMED & ANOR V THE STATE
June 4, 2025
RALPH NWAZURIKE & ORS V A.G. OF THE FEDERATION
June 4, 2025
AMINU MOHAMMED & ANOR V THE STATE
June 4, 2025
RALPH NWAZURIKE & ORS V A.G. OF THE FEDERATION
June 4, 2025
Show all

OKIUGBEDI EDJEKPO & 2 ORS V IBOYI ITHIBRI OSIA & 3 ORS

Legalpedia Citation: (2007) Legalpedia (SC) 11123

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Mar 2, 2007

Suit Number: SC.250/2001

CORAM



PARTIES


1. OKIUGBEDI EDJEKPO 2.EDIDI IDOGU3.ITU AKPATABE (substituted by EJENAWO OMOKEFE)(For themselves and on behalf of Iyede Community of Isoko). APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellants as Plaintiff brought an action for declaration of title to Eto land and the Respondent filed a cross action for declaration of title to Uri land. The action was consolidated. The trial court found in favour of the appellant but the Court of Appeal ordered a retrial.


HELD


The Supreme Court held that the proper order in the circumstances of the case was an order of rehearing. The appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the Court of Appeal was affirmed.


ISSUES


Were the learned Justices right in setting aside the judgment of the trial court on the ground that evidence of DW1-4 were missing from the records when:- (a) Judgment was based on traditional evidence on record and on documentary evidence Exhibit D 1.(b) Judgment was not based on evidence of DW1-4.(c) There was no appeal against any finding made by the learned trial Judge.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


WHAT CONSTITUTES MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE


In the circumstance where the entire evidence called by a party is missing in the compiled Record of Appeal, it will be difficult if not impossible to say with certainty that there has been no miscarriage of justice. – Per Katsina-Alu, JSC


INSTANCE WHEN A RETRIAL WILL BE ORDERED


However where a trial court failed in its primary duty of making findings of facts on issues joined in the pleadings and the evidence is such that an appellate court cannot make its findings and come to a decision on all the relevant issues, an order of retrial is the proper order the appellate court should make -Per Onnoghen, JSC.


CASES CITED


1. Fadallah v. Arewa Textiles Mills Ltd (1997) 8 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 518) 546 2. Akinloye v. Eyiyola (1968) N.W.L.R. 923. Kareem v. UBA Ltd (1996) 5 NWLR (Pt. 451) 634


STATUTES REFERRED TO


NONE


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT 

Comments are closed.