TUNDE ASIMI v. THE STATE
April 24, 2025AMOS BUDE v. THE STATE
April 24, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2016) Legalpedia (SC) 02851
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri May 20, 2016
Suit Number: SC 113/2006
CORAM
KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKER
PARTIES
CHITRA KNITTING AND WEAVING MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED APPELLANTS
G. O. AKINGBADE
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Respondent as Plaintiff by an amended writ of summons filed an action against the Defendant now Appellant at the High Court of Ogun State, claiming declarative and injunctive reliefs among which was a declaration that the Agreement dated 4th day of April 1992 for an assignment of all that piece or parcel of land covered in part by a Deed or instrument registered as No 31 at page 31 in Volume 8 of the Lands Registry, Abeokuta, executed by the Plaintiff and the Defendant is the only valid and subsisting Agreement between both parties. The Defendant/Appellant by virtue of an amended statement of defence, counter-claimed for an order of mandatory injunction commanding the Plaintiff to give up possession of the aforesaid parcels of land (together with the buildings) the Defendant having carried out its obligations under the Agreement. After the trial of the case, the learned trial judge dismissed both the claim and counter-claim of the parties on the ground that Exhibits A’- A1 and ‘B’ relied upon by both parties were registrable instruments which were not so registered and as such they ought not to have been tendered and admitted in evidence. However the court raised an issue suo motu and without giving the parties the right to be heard went ahead to determine the issue. Upset by the decision of the court, each of parties filed a separate appeal before the Court of Appeal which also affirmed the decision of the trial court. Still dissatisfied they have further appealed to the Supreme Court.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
1. Whether the Court of Appeal should not have considered other issues raised before their Lordships other than that concerning the matter raised by the learned trial Chief Judge suo motu?
2. Whether the Court of Appeal could not have evaluated evidence before the Court on the main documents in question in the case, give judgment thereon without remitting the case to the High Court?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999(As Amended)
2. High Court of Ogun State Land Instruments Registration Law Cap 53, Laws of Ogun State 1976
3. Supreme Court Act Cap 424, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria
