CHIEF P.I. MOKELU V. FEDERAL COMMISSIONER FOR WORKS AND HOUSING - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

CHIEF P.I. MOKELU V. FEDERAL COMMISSIONER FOR WORKS AND HOUSING

EUGENE MERIBE V. JOSHUA C. EGWU
August 7, 2025
CHIEF J.J. ENWEZOR V. CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA
August 7, 2025
EUGENE MERIBE V. JOSHUA C. EGWU
August 7, 2025
CHIEF J.J. ENWEZOR V. CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA
August 7, 2025
Show all

CHIEF P.I. MOKELU V. FEDERAL COMMISSIONER FOR WORKS AND HOUSING

Legalpedia Citation: (1976) Legalpedia (SC) 11011

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Mar 19, 1976

Suit Number: SC. 140/1975

CORAM


EMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU, JSC. JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT (Read the Leading Judgment)

MADARIKAN, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

NASIR, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


CHIEF P.I. MOKELU APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant took out originating summons in the federal revenue court against the respondent under the public lands acquisition act to determine the amount of compensation payable to the appellant for the compulsory acquisition of his right, title and interest in his land.


HELD


The court held that a question of compensation under section 10 of the public lands acquisition act is not a cause or matter relating to the revenue of the government of the federation.


ISSUES


Whether a question of compensation, under Section 10 of the Public Lands Acquisition Act is a cause or matter, relating to the revenue of the Government of the Federation, as to bring it under the jurisdiction of the Federal Revenue Court.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


COMPENSATION PAID BY GOVERNMENT – IMPLICATION OF


Compensation already paid out is no more government fund nor has government any further right in it and compensation to be paid out is an out-going fund to the government. In other words compensation paid out is government expenditure rather than revenue. Neither in its ordinary meaning nor in its usage can compensation paid out or to be paid out by government be called revenue of the government without overstraining the meaning of the word. When a statute confers a power or authority on a judge to act in a certain case, as the Judge of the Revenue Court has, it becomes imperative on him to exercise the power or authority when the case arises and its exercise duty called for. PER MADARIKAN JSC


CASES CITED


STEPHENS V.ABRAHAM (1902) 27 V.L.R 753

LONDON, MIDLAND & SCOTTISH COMPANY V. ANGLO-SCOTTISH RLY ASSESSMENT AUTHORITY (1933)150 LT 361

MACDOGALL V. PATTERSON (1851)138 ER 672


STATUTES REFERRED TO


PUBLIC LANDS ACQUISITION ACT

FEDERAL REVENUE COURT DECREE 1973

RAILWAY (VALUATION FOR RATING) ACT 1939


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.