Legalpedia Citation: (2024-12) Legalpedia 88448 (CA)

In the Court of Appeal

Wed Dec 4, 2024

Suit Number: CA/G/23/2024

CORAM

Ali abubakar Babandi Gumel Justice of the Court of Appeal

Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu Justice of the Court of Appeal

Mohammed Danjuma Justice of the Court of Appeal

PARTIES

ALHAJI BUKAR CUSTOM

APPELLANTS

1. MUSTAPHA SHETTIMA
2. UMAR IMAM GANA
3. HAJJA BINTU UK
4. BABAGANA SHETTIMA

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The dispute concerns land at BOSA/168
Ngaranam Residential Layout, Maiduguri, Borno State. The Respondents were
allocated four contiguous plots of land by the Borno State Government with
statutory rights of occupancy. They fenced the plots and planted economic
trees. The Appellant claimed ownership through a chain of title from one Alhaji
Umara Allajiri who was granted the land in 1982, sold it to Alhaji Bukar
Gonimi, who then sold it to the Appellant in 1996. The Appellant erected two
rooms and a gate on the land. The Respondents sued for declaration of title,
damages for trespass, and injunctive relief.

HELD

The appeal was dismissed. The Court affirmed the lower court’s decision and awarded costs of N200,000 against the Appellant.

ISSUES

1. Whether the trial Court was right to declare EXHIBITS A, B, C and D in favor of the respondents considering EXHIBIT I and the evidence at trial.
2. Whether the trial Court was right to hold that the appellant could not prove his title to the land.

 

RATIONES DECIDENDI

BURDEN OF PROOF IN LAND CASES – WHETHER PLAINTIFF MUST SUCCEED ON STRENGTH OF CASE

“It is rudimentary law that the
evidential burden of establishing a case and succeeding on the strength of his
case as opposed to the weakness of the case of the defendant rests on the
plaintiff.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

SHIFTING OF EVIDENTIAL BURDEN – WHEN IT OCCURS:

“The law is settled that in civil
cases the legal burden of proof in the sense of establishing a case lies on the
plaintiff, being the person who would fail if no evidence were adduced at all.
However, this is not invariably so as there are circumstances in our adjectival
law when the burden of proof shifts to the defendant.” – Per Ugochukwu
Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

 

 

PROOF OF TITLE TO LAND – ESTABLISHED METHODS:

“The law is settled on the five ways
of proving title to land as laid down in the locus classicus of IDUNDUN vs.
OKUMAGBA (supra), namely: 1. By traditional evidence. 2. By production of
document of title. 3. By acts of ownership over sufficient length of time
numerous and positive enough to warrant the inference that the person is the
true owner. 4. Long possession. 5. By proof of possession of connected or
adjacent land in circumstances rendering it probable that the owner of such
connected or adjacent land would be the owner of the land.” – Per
Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

 

 

DOCUMENT OF TITLE – REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCCESS:

“The mere production of a document of
title does not automatically mean that a party will succeed in the action…
production and reliance upon such an instrument inevitably carries with it the
need for the Court to inquire into some or all of a number of questions.”
– Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

 

 

BURDEN OF PROOF – DUAL MEANING:

“The phrase ‘burden of proof’ in
civil cases has two distinct meanings which can be confusing… Firstly, there
is the burden of proof as a matter of law and the pleadings, this is the legal
burden of proof, or the burden of establishing a case. Then, secondly, there is
the burden of proof in the sense of adducing evidence, which is described as
the evidential burden.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

PROOF OF DEVOLUTION OF TITLE – NECESSITY:

“Where an allegation is made,
positively or negatively and it forms an essential part of a party’s case, the
proof of such allegation rests on such party. In the circumstances of this
matter, the Appellant had the burden of proving the devolution of title he
pleaded from Alhaji Umara Allajiri to Alhaji Bukar Gomini and then to the
Appellant.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

ACTS OF POSSESSION – RELATIONSHIP WITH TITLE:

“Unless a person is shown to have
better title any possessory acts exercised by him on a disputed land will be
mere trespassory acts. So, in the absence of proving better title, any acts of
possession exercised by the Appellant would be good against the whole world
except the person with a better title in which case those acts of possession
will be acts of trespass.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

 

 

APPELLATE INTERFERENCE – WHEN PERMISSIBLE:

“It is abecedarian law that where a
trial Court unquestionably evaluates and justifiably appraises the facts, it is
not the business of an appellate Court to substitute its own views for the
views of the trial Court.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE – TRIAL COURT’S ADVANTAGE:

“The judge at nisi prius is a
peculiar adjudicator. He is the one in the heat of the battle at the trial. He
sees the faces of the witnesses, hears their testimony, feels the tension, and
observes the demeanour of the witnesses.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu,
J.C.A.

 

 

ROOT OF TITLE – REQUIREMENT OF PROOF:

“In order for acts of possession to
be ownership of a disputed land, the party who seeks to rely on such acts of
possession and enjoyment of the land must succeed in establishing his root of
title to the land, such that the acts of possession and enjoyment of the land
will be seen as flowing from his root of title.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony
Ogakwu, J.C.A.

 

 

TRIAL COURT’S FINDINGS – PRESUMPTION OF CORRECTNESS:

The law is that the conclusion of
the trial Court on the facts is presumed to be correct, so that presumption
must be displaced by the person seeking to upset the judgment on the
facts.” – Per Ugochukwu Anthony Ogakwu, J.C.A.

BURDEN OF PROOF IN LAND CASES – CLAIMANT’S OBLIGATION:

“It axiomatic, settled and well
established in a long line of decided cases of the Supreme Court and this Court
that in a claim for a declaration of title to land, the initial burden of proof
to establish the claim is on the claimant or claimants as the case may
be.” – Per Ali Abubakar Babandi Gumel, J.C.A.

 

 

PROOF OF PURCHASE – REQUIREMENT:

“The Defendant/Appellant who
vehemently maintained that he bought the land in dispute totally failed to
discharge the burden of proof rightly shifted to him after the prima facie
proof by the claimants/Respondents that they were the original allotees of the
four plots of land.” – Per Ali Abubakar Babandi Gumel, J.C.A.

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

Land Use Act, Cap L5, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004

Evidence Act, 2011

Property and Conveyancing Law, Borno State
CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMENT