CORAM

M.L. UWAIS

OLAJIDE OLATAWURA., JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

O. ACHIKE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ABUBAKAR BASHIR WALL JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

CYPRAIN ONWUAMA APPELLANTS

LOUIS EZEOKOLI RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The respondent claimed that the appellant was a customary tenant of the land in dispute in the customary court. The court called a witness who presided over the meeting of the elders which found that the land belonged to the respondent.

HELD

The court held that the respondent established the declaration of title sought and that the customary court was right in the way it conducted the proceedings.

ISSUES

1. Whether the proof of title to land is on mere preponderance of evidence or on a higher standard, if on mere preponderance of evidence, whether the respondent deserved judgment in his favour both at the trial and at the appellate courts. 2. Was the High Court Awka competent to hear and determine the appeal in respect of customary right of occupancy over land lying in rural area (Nanka), straight from the Customary Court Nanka?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

Dinsey v. Ossey (1939) 5 WACA 177;|Jumai Alhaji Zaria v. Yar Maituwo (1996) NWLR 59;|Ikpang v. Edoho (1978) 6-7 SC 221;|Ibero v. Ume-Ohana (1993) 3 NWLR (pt.277) 510;|Chukwueke v. Okonkwo (1999) 1 NWLR (pt.587) 410;|Duru v. Onwumelu (2001) 18 NWLR (pt.746) 672 (2002), 1 SCM 62|Kaiyaoja v. Egunla (1974) 12 SC 55 at 60-61

STATUTES REFERRED TO

None.|

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT