CORAM
ESO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UWAIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
BELGORES JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
AGBAJE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
CRAIG JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
DIPO RAFIU AYINDE
SAIDU MUSTAFA
APPELLANTS
ALHAJA SAKIRATU SALAWU
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
APPEAL/LAND LAW – POSSESSION- TRESPASS/EVIDENCE- ADMISIBILITY OF EVIDENCE IN PREVIOUS PROCEEDINGS
SUMMARY OF FACTS
Both parties were unable to prove title to the land in dispute but the plaintiff erected survey pillars on the land well before the defendants entered the land.
HELD
The court held that the plaintiff was entitled to succeed for damages in trespass.
ISSUES
Not Available
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CLAIM FOR TITLE TO LAND DIFFERENT FROM CLAIM FOR DAMAGES FOR TRESPASS.
The fact that the plaintiff fails in her claim for title to land does not mean that her claim for damages for trespass to the same land must necessarily fail – Agbaje J.S.C.
POSSESSORY TITLE
Where a plaintiff founds his claim for damages for trespass to land on present possessory title alone his possession of the land in dispute is good against the whole world except the true owners of1he land or anyone claiming through them – Agbaje J.S.C
CASES CITED
1. Amakor v. Benedict Obiefuna (1974) 3 SC. 67 at 75, 76;
2. Shell BP. Ltd. v. Abedi (1974) 1 All NLR
3. Oluwi v Eniola (1967) NMLR. 339
4. Awoonor Renner v Anor. 2 WACA. 28
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The Evidence Act