DR. AKINLADE ORE FALOMO V LAGOS STATE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
August 6, 2025DIAB NASR V COMPLETE HOME ENTERPRISES (NIG) LTD
August 6, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1977-05) Legalpedia (SC) 32815
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri May 13, 1977
Suit Number: SC. 164/1976
CORAM
UDOMA, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
IRIKEFE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OBASEKI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
CHIEF SAMUEL AKPAN NKANU & ORS
APPELLANTS
CHIEF ROBERT ONUN & ORS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
LAND LAW- NON-SUIT-RES JUDICATA
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellants and the respondents sought declaration of title to the same piece of land. The land had previously been administratively demarcated, and a boundary set. This boundary was confirmed in an earlier suit where the appellants were non-suited and now sought to re-litigate the matter afresh.
HELD
The court held that the doctrine of res judicata operates against the appellants because the land in dispute was the same that was administratively demarcated and judicially pronounced on.
ISSUES
Whether the conclusions reached by the learned trial judge was wrong in law because the final order made by the the ogoja provincial court in suit no 4/1929 was a non-suit, which therefore entitled them to re-litigate the whole issues again and that it was on that basis that the present suit was instituted by them
RATIONES DECIDENDI
<br
ORDER NON-SUIT IN A CLAIM FOR DECLARATION OF TITLE TO LAND
A non-suit in a claim for declaration of title to land postulates that the case of the plaintiff on the evidence has some merit showing that the plaintiff is entitled to the land claimed or at least to some part thereof but owing to some technical fault or defect in the handling or presentation of the case, the plaintiff has been unable to discharge to the satisfaction of the court the heavy burden placed on him and at the same time, that the defendant not being entitled to the judgement of the court, justice demands that the door should still be left open to enable the plaintiff if he so wishes to re-litigate the issue and probably make good the technical fault or defect which was responsible for the plaintiffs failure on the previous occasion” PER UDO UDOMA JSC
CASES CITED
SIR ADESOJI ADEREMI V.JOSHUA ADEDIRE (1966) NMLR 398
IHENACHO NWANERI V. ORIUWA &ORS (1959) 4 FSC 136
WILLIAM UDE &ORS V.JOSEPH AGU &ORS (1961) 1 ALL NLR 65
MUSTAPHA S.B DAWODU V.SABINA GOMEZ 12 WACA 151
OKWO EJIOFOR V EZE ONYEKWE &ORS (1972) 1 ALL NLR (PT2) 527
J.M KODILINYE V. MBANEFO ODU 2 WACA 336
RUFAI V.RICKETT 2 WACA 95
AKURU V.OLUBADAN 14 WACA 523-524
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available
