CORAM

PARTIES

APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The action which has resulted in this appeal was commenced by the plaintiff on his own behalf and the Akinlade family by a writ of summons in suit No. 1/567/84 against S. A. Aremu.  Following the death of S. A. Aremu, Bayo Asani was substituted for him and who became the 1st defendant/respondent in this appeal.

HELD

The Appeal was dismissed.   ?

ISSUES

“(1) whether grounds 4 & 7 of the grounds of appeal to the Court of Appeal were vague and ought to be struck out.(2) Whether the Court of Appeal was right to hold that evidenc.e of the plaintiff’s witness conflict with his root of title as pleaded and that his claim might be dismissed.(3) Whether the issue as to whether Atannagbowo was a rich farmer and money lender or palm wine taper/farm labourer is irrelevant.(4) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in confirming trial judge’s findings that Atannagbowo came on to the land in dispute by way of pledge rather than by inheritance.(5) Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the trial court had faithfully summarized the evidence in the case and had adequately considered the appellant’s case.”?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

GROUND OF APPEAL.

It is thus clear that under the Rules, an appellant who alleges in his ground of appeal misdirection and/or errors in law is obliged to set out the alleged wrongs committed by the Court against whose judgment he is appealing. Per A. O. EJIWUNMI, JSC

CASES CITED

N.I.P.C. v. Thompson Organisation (1969) 1 A.N.L.R. 138 at 142Afuyeye v. Ashamu (1987) 1 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 49) 267 at 282Okorie v. Udom (1960) 5 F.S.C. 162 at 164Nsirim v. Nsirim (1990) 2 N.S.C.C. 302 at 310Basil Akelozi v. The State (1993) 10 L.R.C.N. 264 at 268Enang v. Adu (1981) 11-12 S.C 25 at 42;?

STATUTES REFERRED TO

NONE

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT