CORAM

---

S.M.A. BELGORE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

KUTIGI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

ONU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

KALGO, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

UWAIFO, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

AKAAER JOV

APPELLANTS 

---

KUTUKU DOM

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND – EVIDENCE-JURISDICTION-AREA COURT

 

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant claimed declaration of title to land in the Area Court and relied on a customary arbitration in his favour. The respondent did not give any evidence.

 

 

---

HELD

---

The court held that the court of appeal was in error to have interfered with the findings of fact made by the area court based on the credible evidence before it and that the area court had jurisdiction.

 

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether or not the Court of Appeal was right in upholding the decision of the trial Area Court Ihugh, which lacked the jurisdiction and competence to hear and determine the claim of the respondent.

2. Whether or not the Court of Appeal was right in re-evaluating the evidence, affecting the credibility of witnesses and affirming the decision of the trial Area Court by holding that ‘the appellant (respondent herein) did prove his case on the preponderance of evidence as required by law’ and therefore overturning the decision of the appellate High Court

 

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

PARTIES TO ADDRESS COURT ON ISSUES SUO MOTU RAISED BY IT

---

‘It is true, question of law and jurisdiction can be raised at any time in the proceedings, but it is not on a free for all procedure. The court can raise a matter of law and Constitution at any time, but in doing so the two sides must be afforded the opportunity of addressing on it. This basically goes to the spirit of fair hearing’. Per  Belgore J.S.C

 

 

---

APPELLATE COURT NOT TO INTERFERE IN TRIAL COURT’S FINDINGS

---

‘An appellate court cannot interfere with the clear and supported findings of facts of the trial court’. Per  Belgore J.S.C

 

 

---

COURT WITH JURISDICTION OVER LAND COVERED BY CUSTOMARY RIGHT OF OCCUPANCY

---

‘The land in dispute is covered presumably under the Land Use Act by Customary Right of Occupancy and not Statutory Right of Occupancy and the court with jurisdiction in Benue State is the Area Court’. Per  Belgore J.S.C

 

 

---

CASES CITED

---

Omoregie & Ors v. Idugiemwanye & ors. (1985) NSCC (Vol.8)(Pt.11) 838 (1985) 2 NLR (Pt.5) 41

Ejabulor v. Osha (1990) 5 NWLR (Pt. 148) 1

Olowu (1985) 3 NWLR (Pt. (3) 372; Agbeja v. Agbeja (1985) 3 NWLR (Pt.11) 11

 

 

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

The Land Use Act

 

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT