DR E.J. ESENOWO VS DR I. UKPONG & ANOR
June 27, 2025AWA OKORIE UCHENDU & ORS VS CHIEF EYO OGBONI & ORS
June 27, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (1999) Legalpedia (SC) 13111
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Apr 30, 1999
Suit Number: SC. 150/1993
CORAM
M.L. UWAIS – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
S.M.A. BELGORE – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
I.L. KUTIGI – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
E.O. OGWUEGBU – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
A.I. IGUH – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
GODWIN I. OKEKEMRS. PATRICIA OKOYEMR. ANTHONY OSITA OKOYE (2nd and 3rd appellants as the administrators of the estate of late Patrick Okoye) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
A search by the plaintiffs at the Land Registry, Port Harcourt disclosed that the 1st plaintiff’s building lease was purportedly cancelled by gazette Notice No. 56 Vol. 4 of the 1st November, 1972 and that an agreement of sale by the Rivers State Government was registered against the property in the name of the defendant as the State lessee. The defendant, for her part, claimed to have bought the property in dispute from the Rivers State Government in the year 1982. This was by virtue of a Deed of Conveyance dated the 16th September, 1982 and registered as No.77 at page 77 in volume 95 at the Lands Registry in the office at Port Harcourt.
HELD
The Edicts No.15 and 17 and the Cancellation Notice made in regard to the appellant’s property, to with: Rivers State Government Notice No.412 of 26th day of September, 1973 are void, of no effect and unconstitutional as being inconsistent with the clear and mandatory provisions of Section 31 of the Constitution of the Federation of Nigeria, 1963
ISSUES
Whether the court below was in error by holding that they were given a fair hearing when the learned trial Judge failed to rule on their Counsel’s written application for an adjournment of the appeal on the ground of his appearance before the Court of Appeal but proceeded instead to call on them to go with their case in his absence?Whether that the Court of Appeal was in error by holding that the trial court had no jurisdiction to entertain the claims by virtue of the provisions of the Rivers State Lands (Cancellation of Leases) Edicts Nos. 15 and 17 of 1972?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE NEED NOT BE SPECIFICALLY PLEADED
The law is well settled that documentary evidence and this includes Letters of Administration, need not he specifically pleaded so long as facts and not the evidence by which such a document is covered are pleaded. -Per Anthony Ikechukwu Iguh JSC
FIXING ADJOURNMENT IS AT THE DISCRETION OF COURT
Adjournments of cases fixed for hearing are not obtainable as a matter of course but may be granted or refused at the discretion of the court. The exercise of this discretion, however, is a judicial act against which an aggrieved party may lodge an appeal, but since it is a matter of discretion, an appellate court will be slow to interfere with it. – Per Anthony Ikechukwu Iguh JSC
CASES CITED
Alhaji B. Thanni and Another v Sabaiemont Saibu and Others (1977) 2 S.C. 89 at 114 Abaye v Ofili & Anor.(1986) 1 NWLR (Pt. 15) 134Abiodun Odusote v OlaitanOdusote (1971)1 NMLR 228African Continental Bank Ltd. v Agbanyim (1960)5 F.S.C. 19Chief Ereku v Governor Mid-Western State (1974) 10 S.C. pp 59 – 76Harrods Ltd. v Lawrence Anifalaje and another (1986) 5 NWLR (Pt.43) 603LawalOwosho v Dada (1984) 7 S.C. 149 at 163
STATUTES REFERRED TO
The constitution of the Federation of Nigeria, 1963Rivers State Lands (Cancellation of Leases) Edicts Nos. 15 and 17 of 1992The Supreme Court Act, Cap. 424, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990?
