DURO ADERETI & ORS V ALHAJI TAJUDEEN OKE

Legalpedia Citation: (2024-01) Legalpedia 57542 (CA)

In the Court of Appeal

Holden At Akure

Thu Jan 11, 2024

Suit Number: CA/AK/39/2018

CORAM

Oyebisi Folayemi Omoleye Justice, Court of Appeal

Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo Justice, Court of Appeal

Yusuf Alhaji Bashir Justice, Court of Appeal

PARTIES

DURO ADERETI
ALIMI OYEWOLE
MATTHEW AMEMILUYI (For Themselves And On Behalf Of Saka Disu Family Of Lodi Compound, Ile-Ife)

APPELLANTS

ALHAJI TAJUDEEN OKE Substituted For Oba-Lamidi Oke

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

APPEAL, EVIDENCE, LAND, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellants as Plaintiffs claimed against the Respondent the entitlement to the Statutory Right of Occupancy in respect of the parcel of land lying and situate at Awosun Village, Ife/Ilasa Express way, Ile-Ife Osun State of Nigeria, which is delineated on the dispute survey plan No: OS/0236/DISP/2012/009 dated the 3rd February, 2012 drawn by Surveyor Femi Falade and verged BLUE.

The Respondent on the other hand upon denying the Appellants allegation proceeded to make the following counter-claim in his further amended statement of defence that he was entitled to be granted the Statutory Right of Occupancy of the parcel of land situate, lying and being at Tafa Jerin otherwise referred to as Oke Awosun, Ipetumodu, Osun State, and bounded on the 1st side by Sakin and Yesufu’s Cocoa Farms, on the 2nd side by Awosun Stream and on the third side by Ife/Ibadan Old Road.

After listening to evidence and considering address from their respective counsels the Trial Court eventually dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims and then granted the Respondent’s counter-claim.

Piqued by the decision, the Appellants filed an appeal to this Court.

HELD

Appeal dismissed

ISSUES

Whether the trial Court was right to have held that the Respondent proved his Title to the disputed land by traditional evidence?
Whether the trial Court was right to refuse to take judicial notice of the notorious fact of the none existence of “Western State of Nigeria” as at 1959 when Nigeria as country was yet to be independent as contained in the respondent’s Exhibits DA4 and DA5?
Whether the trial Court was right to rely on inadmissible evidence in arriving at its decision that the Respondent had proved Title to the disputed land by Documentary evidence?

RATIONES DECIDENDI

PRELIMINARY OBJECTION – WHERE A PRELIMINARY OBJECTION IS NOT MOVED BEFORE THE HEARING OF THE APPEAL

The consequence of failure of the respondent to move the preliminary objection before the hearing of the appeal, is that the preliminary objection is deemed abandoned. See MAGIT V. UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE MAKURDI (2005) 19 NWLR (PT. 959) 211. – Per Y. A. Bashir, JCA

COURTS – CONDUCT OF COURTS WHERE THERE ARE TWO CLAIMANTS TO A PARCEL OF LAND

The law is now settled thus, where there are two claimants to a parcel of land, declaration of ownership is made in favour of the party who proves a better title. See ADOLE V. GWAR (2008) 11 NWLR (PT. 1099) 562.

The task before the trial Court in this matter therefore was to determine who between the respondent and the Appellants led a better evidence on the ownership of the parcel of land in dispute. See RABIU V. ADEBAJO (2012) LPELR- 9709(SC), ARASE V. ARASE (1981) 5 SC 33. – Per Y. A. Bashir, JCA

APPEAL – WHERE AN APPELLANT DOES NOT APPEAL DECISIONS AND FINDINGS OF THE LOWER/TRIAL COURT

It is indeed an undisputed position of the law that any finding and or orders of the Court for which there is no appeal on it, stands accepted and binding.

The law is that an appellant remains bound by the decision and findings of the Court on which he raised no grounds of appeal; such findings remain conclusive and binding. See ALARIBE V. OKWUONO (2016) 1 NWLR (PT. 1492) 41 at 66, GWANTU V. YAKI (2013) LPELR-21416, NZE V. ARIBE (2016) LPELR – 40617 (CA). – Per Y. A. Bashir, JCA

DECLARATORY RELIEFS – DUTY OF PARTIES SEEKING DECLARATORY RELIEFS

A declaratory relief like the one sought by the Appellants in this case, it is not granted as a matter of course. The plaintiff must adduce strong and credible evidence in support of his claim to be entitled to judgment. NETWORKS SECURITY LTD. V. DAHIRU (2008) ALL FWLR (PT. 419) 4750, HADEJIA V. ABBAS (2016) LPELR- 40234.

A party claiming declaratory orders must establish his entitlement on the strength of his case not on the weakness of the case of his opponent. See OGUNDANA V. AWE & ORS (2015) LPELR-25663 (CA). – Per Y. A. Bashir, JCA

EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE – THE COURT BEARING THE PRIMARY DUTY OF EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE – CONDUCT OF APPELLATE COURTS TO THE PROPER EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE BY TRIAL/LOWER COURTS

It is the primary responsibility of a trial Court to evaluate evidence presented by parties before it, ascribe probative value to the evidence and then come up with a decision which involves the reasoned belief of the evidence of one of the contending parties and disbelief of the other or a reason preference of one version to the other.

JULIUS BERGER (NIG.) PLC V. ALMIGHTY PROJECT INNOVATIVES LTD. & ANOR (2021) LPELR-56611 (SC).

The learned trial Judge has done all that is required to make evaluation of evidence valid and proper. And in such circumstance, this Court will have no reason to enter into any further evaluation. It’s absolutely unnecessary. – Per Y. A. Bashir, JCA

REGISTRATION OF LAND INSTRUMENT – WHETHER IT IS A REQUIREMENT TO REGISTER LAND INSTRUMENT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ADMISSIBILITY

Moreover, the requirements for the registration of a land instrument for the purpose of admissibility in evidence under the various States’ Lands Instrument Registration Law enacted by States Houses of Assembly similar to Section 16 of the Land Instrument Registration Law Cap. 64 Laws of Osun State cited and relied upon in this case to discredit Exhibits DA4 and DA5 respectively, has been abrogated and struck down by the Supreme Court in the case of ANAGBADO VS. FARUK (2018) LPELR – 44909 where the Supreme Court held:

“A piece of evidence admissible under the Evidence Act cannot be rendered inadmissible in evidence by any law enacted by the House of Assembly of any State.” – Per Y. A. Bashir, JCA