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.|