Just Decided Cases

E. O. FASORO AND ANOTHER VS OLALERE BEYIOKU AND OTHERS

Legalpedia Citation: (1988-07) Legalpedia 80799 (SC)

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Holden At Lagos

Fri Jul 22, 1988

Suit Number: SC 160/1985

CORAM


OBASEKI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

KAWU, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

OPUTA, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

AGBAJE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

WALI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


E. O. FASORO AND ANOTHER

APPELLANTS 


OLALERE BEYIOKU AND OTHERS

RESPONDENTS 


AREA(S) OF LAW


LAND LAW – DECLARATION OF TITLE – INJUNCTON – PROOF OF OWNERSHIP

 


SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellants/Plaintiffs in the Court of first instance sued the Defendants/Respondents for Declaration of title, damages for Trespass and injunction on a piece or parcel of land. The Plaintiffs won in the Court of first instance and the Defendants lost.

 


HELD


That where there are conflicting claims to ownership and possession as in this case, effective and exclusive possession needed to establish trespass cannot be ascribed to the plaintiffs who failed to show better title.

 


ISSUES


Did the Plaintiffs succeed in proving a valid transfer of the land in dispute from the Olayalo family (in whom, as they pleaded, the radical title resides), to them?

 


RATIONES DECIDENDI


EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PROVE TITLE IN AN ACTION FOR DECLARATION OF TITLE


‘When a Plaintiff pleads Sale and Conveyance as his root of title, he either succeeds in proving the Sale or Conveyance or he fails. Where he succeeds, he wins and where he fails his case ought to be dismissed. ‘Per. C.A. OPUTA, JSC.

 


PRESUMPTION OF POSSESSION.


‘That once radical title has been pleaded and proved, acts of ownership or possession resulting from such title, need no longer be considered for they are then non issues.’ Per. C.A. OPUTA, JSC.

 


EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PROVE TITLE IN AN ACTION FOR DECLARATION OF TITLE


‘Where both parties claimed ownership of the land in dispute, and both also claimed various acts of ownership and possession in and over the land. When such is the case, the law is that he who can prove title is in actual possession and the other is a trespasser.’ Per. C.A. OPUTA, JSC

 


CASES CITED


Akerele v. Atunrase (1969) 1 All NLR 201.

Chief Oyelakin Balogun AND OTHERS v. Oladosu Akanji AND anor. S.C. 94/1986 delivered on 12th February, 1988 [(1988) 1 NWLR. (Pt. 70) 301]:-

Da Costa v. ikomi (1968) 1 All NLR. 394 at p.398:

Ogbechie AND OTHERS v. Onochie AND OTHERS S.C. 193/1985 delivered on 19th February, 1988 [(1988) 1 NWLR (Pt. 70) 370].

Ekpo v. Ita 11 NLR 68.

 


STATUTES REFERRED TO


Evidence Act Cap 62 of 1958,

 


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Esther ORIAH

Recent Posts

JAMES OGUNTIMEYIN VS KPEKPE GUBERE & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (1964-04) Legalpedia 86080 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden At Abuja…

5 hours ago

IBOJE ITAMBONG & ORS VS MICHAEL AKONYE

Legalpedia Citation: (1964-04) Legalpedia 83180 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden At Abuja…

5 hours ago

SAMSON AYOOLA & ORS VS DAVID OGUNJIMI

Legalpedia Citation: (1964-05) Legalpedia 43330 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden At Abuja…

5 hours ago

MOMODU ADISA VS THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (1964-06) Legalpedia 21072 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden At Abuja…

6 hours ago

TAMBARI MAIJAMAA VS THE STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (1964-06) Legalpedia 16533 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden At Abuja…

6 hours ago

MICHAEL ADEDAPO OMISADE & ORS VS THE QUEEN

Legalpedia Citation: (1964-06) Legalpedia 56536 (SC) In the Supreme Court of Nigeria Holden At Abuja…

6 hours ago