Legalpedia Citation: (2014) Legalpedia (CA) 21151
In the Court of Appeal
Thu Feb 27, 2014
Suit Number: CA/IL/46/2013
CORAM
HUSSEIN MUKHTAR JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL
PARTIES
ALHAJI YAKUBU ABDUL LATEJU (For and on behalf of Abdul Lateju’s family) APPELLANTS
LUBCON NIGERIA LIMITED RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Claimant/Appellant instituted an action against the Defendant /Respondent claiming a declaration that its family is the bona fide owner of a parcel of land which the Respondents have encroached upon, a declaration that the purported occupation by the Defendant/Respondent of the land is illegal, null and void and perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant/Respondent and their agents from further acts of trespass. It was the Defendant/Respondent’s contention that the Kwara State Government had revoked all rights and interests and acquired the land in question for public purpose for over 15 years. The trial court declared the purported compulsory acquisition for public purpose null and void and also refused the claims of the Claimant/Appellant hence this appeal.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
1. Whether the evidence proffered by the Applicant, the contents of Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 and the admission of DWl under Cross examination have not established that the Appellants family is the customary owner of the land in dispute.?
2. Whether the trial Court was right to have at the same time impeached the title of the Respondent and denied the Appellant title to the disputed land.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND-ONUS OF PROOF-HOW DISCHARGED
“The discharge of the onus placed on the Plaintiff begins from his pleadings or averments on how his predecessors came in to ownership of the land and how it devolved to him before stretching out to the evidence of the Plaintiff in prove of his averments. Once the pleading of a Plaintiff is wanting on the history of ownership and its devolution, it becomes absolutely difficult for the Plaintiff to discharge the burden of proof satisfactorily”. PER ONYEMENAM, JCA
DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND-WHETHER A PLAINTIFF CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE EVIDENCE OF THE DEFENCE WHICH SUPPORTS HIS CASE
“In an action for declaration of title to land or right, a Plaintiff can take advantage of evidence of the defence which supports his case”. PER ONYEMENAM, JCA
DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND-GRANT OF-DUTY OF A PLAINTIFF
“Also fundamental to the grant of declaration of title to land or any other right for that matter, the Plaintiff is required by the law to satisfy the trial Court by his evidence that he is entitled to such a declaration”. PER ONYEMENAM, JCA
TRESPASS- MEANING OF-PROPER PLAINTIFF IN ACTION FOR TRESPASS
“The law is settled beyond peradventure that trespass is a wrong against possession. So the proper Plaintiff in an action for trespass is the person in possession. The least possession in the Plaintiff entitles him to maintain an action for trespass unless and until the Defendant shows better title. See: AFRICAN CONTINENTAL SEAWAYS LTD V. NIGERIAN DREDGING ROADS & GENERAL WORKS LTD. (1977) 5 SC 235; OVERSEAS CONSTRUCTION LTD V. CREEK ENT. LTD. (1985) 1 NWLR (PT. 1) 105. By this principle of law, therefore a trespasser on land can maintain an action for trespass against everyone, except the true owner.” PER ONYEMENAM, JCA
TRADITIONAL HISTORY-WHERE RELIED ON BY A PARTY-DUTY ON THE PARTY
“For a party relying on evidence of traditional history in prove of his title to succeed he must plead and give evidence on:
-His progenitor that founded the land in dispute
-How the land was founded. That is by conquest, settlement or otherwise
-The circumstances leading to the founding of the land.
-How each of the successive persons came to have title vested in them in an unbroken chain until it devolved on the claimant.
-The link between the founder of the land and the respective successive family members.” PER ONYEMENAM, JCA
CASES CITED
Ajukwara V. Izuoji (2002) 6 S.C(PT. 11) 116Ebba V. Ogodo & Anr. (1984) N.S.C.C (VOL. 15) 255Ejowhomu V. Edok-Ete Mandilas Ltd. (1986) 2 N.S.C.C (VOL. 17, PT. 11) 1184;Fasoro V. Beyioku (1988) 2 NWLR (PT 76) 263;Irawo V. Adedokun (2005) 1 NWLR (PT 906) 199;Jason Umesie & 5 Ors V. Hyde Ekpenyong Onuaguluchi & 7 Ors (1995) 9 NWLR (PT. 421).Moses Okhuarobo & 2 Ors V. Chief Egharevba Augbe (2002) 9 NWLR (PT. 771) 29;N.B.N LTD V. T.A.S.A. LTD (1996) 8 NWLR (PT.468) 511.Odi V. Iyala (2004) 8 NWLR (PT 875) 283;Onisaodu V. Elewuju (2006)13 NWLR (PT.998) 517Osho V. Foreign Finance Corporation (1991) 4 NWLR (PT 184) 157Rabiatu Adebayo & 3 Ors V. Rasheed Shogo (2005) 7 NWLR (PT. 925) 467 Ressel L. Y.Dakolo & 2 Ors V.Gregoryrewane – Dakolo & 3 Ors (2011) 16 NWLR (PT.1272) 22Universal Vulcanising (Nig.) Ltd V. Ijesha United – Trading & Transport Company Ltd & Ors (1992)