SABURI ADEBAYO VS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OGUN STATE
June 6, 2025ALHAJA K.F. IBIYEYE V. A.A. FOJULE & ORS
June 6, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2006) Legalpedia (SC) 18555
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Feb 10, 2006
Suit Number: SC.214/2001
CORAM
SALIHU MODIBBO ALFA BELGORE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT
AKINTOLA OLUFEMI EJIWUNMI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
IGNATIUS CHUWUDI PATS-ACHOLONU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ALOMA MARIAM MUHKTAR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHIEF S.O. AWOYOOLU & ANOR APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondents claimed title over a piece of land through traditional evidence.
HELD
The Court held that there was no reason to disturb the concurrent findings of fact by the two lower courts and as such dismissed the appeal.
ISSUES
1. Whether the respondents proved that Ogunbunmi, daughter of Ogunbuwa, was married to Aina Olaofe, and that Aina Olaofe and his wife Ogunbunmi settled on the land exercising maximum right of ownership on the land. 2. Whether the failure of proof aforementioned has not affected plaintiffs’ case.3. Whether S.146 Evidence Act would not avail appellants because plaintiffs admitted the defendants were on the land.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
PRODUCTION OF SURVEY PLAN
In fact, it is long established that where a party to a land dispute, had produced and tendered the survey plan showing, the area he is claiming with certainty and ascertainable boundaries, that party, need not call a surveyor to testify before the trial court, can attach credibility to such a survey plan. I.F. OGBUAGU, JSC
CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF FACTS OF LOWER COURTS WILL NOT BE SET ASIDE EXCEPT WHERE IT IS PERVERSE
In a long line of decisions by this Court clear findings of facts by trial court should not be disturbed by the appellate court. If the findings are supported by evidence and are not in conflict with any law on admissible evidence, and they are not perverse or amount to a miscarriage of justice, the appellate court will give clear approval to the findings. I.F. OGBUAGU, JSC
PRODUCTION OF SURVEY PLAN
In fact, it is long established that where a party to a land dispute, had produced and tendered the survey plan showing, the area he is claiming with certainty and ascertainable boundaries, that party, need not call a surveyor to testify before the trial court, can attach credibility to such a survey plan. I.F. OGBUAGU, JSC
CASES CITED
1. A.R. Mogaji Ors. V. Madam Rabiatu Odofin (1978(4 S.C. 912. Ajibade Garba V. Abu Akacha (1966) NMLR 623. Akinloye & Anor. V. Eyiyola & Ors. (1968) N.M.L.R. 924. Akpagbue V. Ogu (1976) 6 S.C. 635. Akpandja V. Egblomesse (1939) 5 WACA 10
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. Evidence Act Cap 112 Laws Of The Federation Of Nigeria, 1990
