CORAM

---

ALOMA MARIAM MUKHTAR, JSC JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT(Lead Judgment)

---

PARTIES

---

1. ELEM CHUKWU IBATOR

2. MONDAY IBATOR

3. ELIJAH ZIAH(For themselves and as representing their Ekirikumafamily of Ikarama Village in Okordia Yenegoa Local Government Area of Bayelsa).

APPELLANTS 

---

CHIEF BELL BARAKURO & 3 ORS

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellants and Respondents had a disagreement as to who was entitled to the compensation due and payable by Agip Oil Company Limited in respect of damage done by the company in the course of its operations in the area. The appellants maintain that their family is exclusively entitled to the entire amount of compensation to be paid because they are exclusive owners of the land in question.

---

HELD

---

The Court held that the contention of the appellants that the respondents were not entitled to succeed because they failed to prove title to the land is totally erroneous.

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the court below was wrong to have held that title to the land the subject of claim for compensation by the parties claimants, was not in issue.2. Whether the court below was wrong to have upheld the trial court’s decision that the identity and extent of the land in this case were not in dispute.3. Whether the court below was wrong to have failed to hear and determine the appellant’s pending motion to adduce further evidence on appeal before proceeding to judgment.

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

JURISDICTION – COMPETENCE OF COURT TO TREAT CLAIMS NOT BROUGHT BEFORE IT

---

“Thus, in the absence of any claim for declaration of title in the present case, the learned trial judge was right in resisting any attempt of being dragged into the issue in his judgment which was affirmed by the court, below.” Per MAHMUD MOHAMMED, JSC

---

DAMAGE TO PROPERTY – WHO CAN CLAIM

---

“The position in law is that it is possible for a tenant on or an occupier of a parcel of land to successfully claim damages for his properties, including farm corps, damaged on the land. He needs not prove title to such land before he could succeed. All he needs to establish is that his property on the land was damaged. It follows therefore that the contention of the appellants that the respondents were not entitled to succeed because they failed to prove title to the land is totally erroneous.” Per S. A. AKINTAN, JSC

---

CASES CITED

---

Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited & anor. v. Chief Monokpo & anor

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

NONE.

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT