CORAM
MUHAMMADU LAWAL UWAIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
SALIHU MODIBBO ALFA BELGORE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ABUBAKAR B. WALI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KUMAI BAYANG AKAAHS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
EMMANUEL O. OGWUEGBU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
BALA UMARUBINTA UMARU APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
Bidda who came from the West entered the house of Mallam Maikara which he inherited from his father Inuwa, her claim was that the same house also belong to her father Dalha.
HELD
The appeal was allowed.
ISSUES
1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in taking the issue of the ages of witnesses of the appellants before the trial court suo motu, without hearing the parties and drawing the inference that the evidence of the appellants’ witnesses is unreliable and or suspect.
2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the possession of the properties by Inuwa for a period of 22 years could not be a ground for a claim of hauzi long possession and or prescription in Muslim law.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
TREATMENT OF THE COURT TO ISSUE(S) RAISED SUO MOTU BY AN APPELLATE COURT
“An appellate court should not ordinarily suo motu raise an issue or issues which the parties do not raise, but if so raised, no decision should be based on the same unless the parties or their counsel are afforded the opportunity of being heard.” Wali, JSC.
CASES CITED
1. Din v. A.-G. of the Federation (1988)9 S.C.19;(1988) 4 NWLR (Pt. 84)147 at 150
2. Mogaji v. Cadbury Nig. Ltd. (1985) 2 NWRL (Pt. 7) 393
3. A.-G. of Ova State v. Fairlakes Hotel Ltd. (1988) 12 SC(Pt. 1) 1; (1988) 12 SCNJ 1;(1988) 5 NWLR (Pt.92) 1
4. Odiase & Anor. v. Agho & Ors. (1972) 1 All NLR (Pt. 1) 170 at 176
5. Juwo v. Shehu & I Or. (1992) 8 NWLR (Pt.258) 129; (1992) 10 SCNJ 26 at 31 .
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.