CORAM

E.O. OGWUEGBU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

U. MOHAMMED, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

S.U. ONU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

CHIEF SAMUEL IKENNA & ANOR APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiffs/applicants brought an application to the Supreme Court for an order enlarging the time within which the appellants/applicants may file the Record and appellants’ brief of argument, Extension of time within which to apply for leave to appeal against the ruling/Judgment of the Court of Appeal, Extension of time within which to file the notice and grounds of appeal and to deem the same as duly filed upon payment of the prescribed fees, Leave to file and argue grounds other than that of law, and Stay of execution of the judgment/ruling of the Court of Appeal. This application was brought due to the fact that the plaintiffs were aggrieved by the decision of the learned trial Judge and they appealed to the Court of Appeal in which the Court of Appeal dismissed their appeal over a declaration of title to land, damages, and perpetual injunction to restrain the defendants, their people, their servants and agents from further trespassing into Ikofia lands or any part of it.

HELD

The application was refused and dismissed

ISSUES

1. Since the Court did not order the parties to produce their own plans, can the Court of Appeal act on the applicants’ strange and unauthorized plan Exhibit 2?2. Since the said plan Exhibit 2 was unauthorized and parties were not asked to produce their own plans will it not amount to re-opening the whole case if the Court of Appeal in enforcing the judgment of the Supreme Court allows the applicants to indirectly re-open the whole case?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

Property and Reversionary Investment Corporation Ltd. v. Templar & Ors. (1977) 1 WLR 1223 at 1225

STATUTES REFERRED TO

NONE

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT