CORAM
IBRAMM TANKO MUHAMMAD, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UWANI MUSA ABBA AJI
AKINTOLA OLUFEMI EJIWUNMI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT.
PARTIES
LASISI ADEGBESAN ABIMBOLA (For himself and on behalf of Abimbola family) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
This was an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which had dismissed the appeal by the plaintiff from the decision of the High Court. The plaintiff for himself and on behalf of the Abimbola family of Gbenla, instituted an action against the defendant for himself and on behalf of the Abatan family claiming, a declaration that the defendant as a Customary Tenant has forfeited on grounds of misconduct his right to occupy all that piece or parcel of land, and recovery of possession of the said land. At the conclusion of hearing, the learned trial Judge, after a careful review of the evidence, found for the defendant and dismissed the plaintiff’s claims. Dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court, the plaintiff lodged an appeal against the same to the Court of Appeal and further to the Supreme Court.
HELD
The appeal failed and was dismissed.
ISSUES
1. Where there is a failure by the trial court to adopt the test in Kojo v. Bonsie 14 WACA 242 in resolving conflict in traditional evidence, what should be the attitude of the Court of Appeal.2. Whether, having regard to the materials before the lower court the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right in failing to make a finding on the root of title relied upon by the parties.3. Whether having regard to the evidence on the record the lower court was right in holding that the plaintiff/appellant failed to prove his case.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
ON NO ACCOUNT SHOULD A COURT OF LAW RAISE A POINT SUO MOTU WITHOUT HEARING THE PARTIES
“It is settled law that on no account should a court of law raise a point suo motu, no matter how clear it may appear to be, and proceed to resolve it one way or the other without hearing the parties.” Per A I. IGUH, JSC.
CONDITION PRECEDENT TO THE CREATION OF A VALID TENANCY UNDER CUSTOMARY LAW
“There can be no doubt that payment of a tribute cannot be said to be a condition precedent to the creation of a valid tenancy under customary law. Nonpayment of tribute is therefore not inconsistent with the creation or existence of customary tenancy as such tenancy may quite properly be established without the payment of tribute under customary law.” Per A I. IGUH, JSC.
THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THE PLAINTIFF IN CIVIL CASES
“It is an elementary principle of law that in civil cases, the onus lies on the plaintiff to satisfy the court that he is entitled on the evidence brought by him to the remedy he claims.” Per A I. IGUH, JSC.
CASES CITED
Kodilinye v. Mbanefo Odu (1935) 2 WACA 336 at 337Frempong v. Brempong (1952) 14 WACA 13 Woluchem v. Gudi (1981) 5 SC. 291.Josiah Akinola and Another v. Fatoyinbo Oluwo and others (1962) 1 AII NLR (Part 2) 224 at 227Oduaran and others v. Asarah and others (1972) 1 AII NLR. (Part 2) 137M.O. Ibeziako v. Nwogbogu and others (1972) 1 AII NLR. (Part 2) 200.Lawani v. Adeniyi (1964) NSCR. Vol.3, 231 at 233Ugo v. Obiekwe (1989) 1 NWLR (Part 99) 566 at 581Okafor v. Nnaife (1972) 3 ECSLR. 261, Oje v. Babalola (1991) 4 NWLR. (Part 185) 267 at 280.Andu Makinde and others v. Dawuda Akinwale and others (2000) 1 SC. 89; (2000) 2 NWLR. (Part 645) 435 etc
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.