CHIEF (PRINCE) R.A. OLUSI VS ALHAJI SAIDI SAIDI - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

CHIEF (PRINCE) R.A. OLUSI VS ALHAJI SAIDI SAIDI

B.B. APUGO & SONS LTD vs ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITALS MANAGEMENT BOARD (OHMB)
April 18, 2025
MR. OSA OSUNDE VS ECOBANK NIGERIA PLC (FORMERLY OCEANIC BANK INTERNATIONAL PLC)
April 18, 2025
B.B. APUGO & SONS LTD vs ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITALS MANAGEMENT BOARD (OHMB)
April 18, 2025
MR. OSA OSUNDE VS ECOBANK NIGERIA PLC (FORMERLY OCEANIC BANK INTERNATIONAL PLC)
April 18, 2025
Show all

CHIEF (PRINCE) R.A. OLUSI VS ALHAJI SAIDI SAIDI

Legalpedia Citation: (2016) Legalpedia (CA) 17141

In the Court of Appeal

Tue Jun 14, 2016

Suit Number: CA/L/272/2014

CORAM



PARTIES


CHIEF (PRINCE) R.A. OLUSI? APPELLANTS


ALHAJI SAIDI SAIDI MADAM LATIFAT TIJANIMR KOLAWOLE ADESEGBA (For themselves and on behalf of all the beneficiaries of late Seidu Adelakun)? RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Claimant/Respondent instituted an action in a representative capacity at the Ikeja Judicial Division of the High Court of Lagos State seeking a declaration that the Claimants are the bona-fide owners of the property now municipally described as No. 3 Idiomo Street/No. 4, Egbe Street, Isale-Eko in the Lagos State of Nigeria by virtue of the Deed of Conveyance dated the 3rd day of June, 1998 registered as No. 7 at page 13 in Volume 33 in the Register of Deeds kept in the Lagos State Lands Registry, an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Defendant whether by himself, servants, agents or privies from meddling or interfering with the said property and the sum of N500,000.00(Five Hundred Thousand Naira) being general damages for acts of trespass committed on the property.  At the close of trial, judgment was entered in favour of the Respondents. Dissatisfied with the said judgement, the Appellant has filed the instant appeal before this court.


HELD


Appeal Allowed


ISSUES


?    Whether the Learned trial Judge was correct in holding that the Respondents have traced their root of title to the purchase made by their grandfather and that they have gone further to trace and establish the title of their grandfather’s vendor?    Whether the Learned trial Judge was correct in holding the identity of the land in dispute was admitted by the Appellant.?    Whether the Learned trial Judge was correct on the true position of the application of the doctrine of Estoppel per rem judicatam as regards the decision of the Registrar of titles Exhibit “11”?    Whether the Learned trial Judge was correct in holding that the Respondents have established a better title to the subject property and are thus entitled to the judgment of the Court.”


RATIONES DECIDENDI


CASES CITED



STATUTES REFERRED TO


Administration of Estates Law Cap. A3 Laws of Lagos State (2003)Evidence Act, 2011


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.