CORAM

---

OYEBISI FOLAYEMI OMOLEYE (PJ), JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

JAMES SHEHU ABIRIYI, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

SAIDU TANKO HUSAINI, JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

---

PARTIES

---

1. ELISHA ANDRAWUS

2. SUNDAY ANDRAWUS SIDDI

 

---

EZEKIEL FITIDAN MAKSHA

 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The claim of the Respondent against the Appellants before the High Court of Adamawa State holden at Yola was for declaration of title to the disputed land, an order of perpetual injunction, general damages and costs. The claim of the father of the Respondent who instituted this action before he died, was that he cleared the land in dispute when it was virgin, used it for farming activities and residential purposes for a period of not less than sixty (60) years, later migrated to Doumayo Village leaving the land in the care of Jangani. The Appellants pleaded with Respondent’s father to be allowed to farm on the land with an undertaking that they would vacate whenever the Respondent’s father wanted the land but the Appellants later drove away Jangani (the caretaker) from the land and started laying claim to it. At a meeting with the Ward Head, the Appellants agreed that the land belongs to the Respondent’s father. In their defence the Appellants stated that according to the history of the land, it was cleared first as virgin land by their grandfather Siddi. Upon the death of Siddi, their father inherited the land and resided on the land undisturbed until he relocated to Kuli Pakka within the vicinity of the disputed land. Though their father relocated residence and settled across the River Ngwarangwaran, he never stopped farming on the disputed land. They were shocked when Jangani who they sued at the Area Court claimed that the land in dispute belongs to the Respondent’s father; and that the father of the Respondent never founded the land in dispute or farmed on it as the assertion that the land was entrusted to Jangani was only a scheme to claim the land from them. The trial Court heard evidence of the parties in Court and at the locus in quo and at the end of the trial, entered judgment in favour of the Respondent. Aggrieved, the Appellants immediately approached this Court by a Notice of Appeal dated 9th October, 2017 (the day the judgment was delivered) but filed the following day 10th October, 2017 containing six Grounds of Appeal.

 

---

HELD

---

Appeal Dismissed

 

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the Court below was right when it entered judgment in favour of the plaintiff having regards to the evidence before it.

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

CASES CITED

---

Not Available

 

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

Not Available|

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT