CHIEF S. OWOOLA LANLEHIN VS KOLA JAMES
July 22, 2025CHIEF DR. (MRS) OLUFUNMILAYO RANSOME-KUTI & ORS V A-G. FEDERATION & ORS
July 22, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1985) Legalpedia (SC) 38611
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Jun 28, 1985
Suit Number: SC. 108/1984
CORAM
KAWU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OKAY ACHIKE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OBASEKI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
NNAMANI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UWAIS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
AFOLABI COKER APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The plaintiff/respondents had gotten judgment in the court below setting aside the sale of land to the appellant on the ground that the land was family land.
HELD
The Court held that the doctrine of laches and acquiescence had not caught up with the respondents and that the land in question is family land as against the contention of the appellant that it was solely owned. The court accordingly dismissed the appeal.
ISSUES
(1) Whether it is open to a court in the trial of an issue on the basis of previous judgments which are tendered by consent, to go behind the judgments and not confine itself to the substance of the decision contained in the judgments. (2) Whether the judgments (Exhibits D, E and F) and memoranda attached to the conveyance, (Exhibits C) and the acts testified to and as found by the trial court do not sustain the defences of laches and acquiescence. (3) (a) Whether in a case where the Plaintiffs rely on their genealogy to found their case the Court was not obliged to make specific findings in very clear terms on the genealogy pleaded and that proved if what was pleaded differs from what was testified to. (b) Is failure to make such clear findings not fatal to a decision on the issue?”
RATIONES DECIDENDI
ATTITUDE OF THE SUPREME COURT TO CONCURRENT FINDINGS OF LOWER COURTS.
“Now the general rule is that where there are two concurrent findings of fact, such findings will not be disturbed by this Court unless there is a substantial error apparent on the record of proceedings.”- Kawu, JSC
CASES CITED
1. Mogo Chinwendu v. Nwanegbo Mbamali and Anor. (1980) 3-4 SC. 31 at p. 75
2. Kofi v. Kofi, 1 W.A.C.A. 284 at page 285
3. Ganiyu Kale v. Madam Coker (1982) 12 SC. 252 at page. 271
STATUTES REFERRED TO
