HAMADU HUNARE & ANOR VS YAYA NANA & ANOR - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

HAMADU HUNARE & ANOR VS YAYA NANA & ANOR

K.A. ONAMADE & ANOR VS AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK LTD.
July 4, 2025
SILAS IKPO & ANOR VS THE STATE
July 4, 2025
K.A. ONAMADE & ANOR VS AFRICAN CONTINENTAL BANK LTD.
July 4, 2025
SILAS IKPO & ANOR VS THE STATE
July 4, 2025
Show all

HAMADU HUNARE & ANOR VS YAYA NANA & ANOR

Legalpedia Citation: (1996) Legalpedia (SC) 82711

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

Mon Jan 15, 1996

Suit Number: SC. 285/1989

CORAM


AMINA AUDI WAMBAI JUSTICE, COURT OF APPEAL

OLAJIDE OLATAWURA., JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

O. OLATAWURA JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


HAMADU HUNAREALL NIGERIA PEOPLES PARTY (ANPP) APPELLANTS


YAYA NANA JAURO YAYA RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appellant was claiming that the farmland in dispute originally belonged to his grandfather, Garba Taliyaje, on whose death the same was inherited by Buba and Umaru, the latter being the father of the appellant. Umaru the appellant’s father lent the farmland to Shehu who was a friend. After the death of the appellant’s father, he made abortive attempts to regain possession of the farmland. Before Shehu died he shared the disputed farmland between the respondents.


HELD


The appeal fails and it is hereby dismissed. The judgment of the Court of Appeal is affirmed with N 1,000.00 costs to the respondents


ISSUES


“(i) What is the true meaning and import of the principle of Islamic law as contained in Mulktasar Khalil Vol. II page 250, namely, “Wabil Mulki Alai Hauzi Li Annal Mulk A Khassu Minal Hauzi” applied (sic) in favour of the plaintiff/respondent by the Sharia Court of Appeal Bauchi? (ii) Whether the Honorable Court of Appeal has properly directed itself to the true meaning and import of the said principle when it held that the Sharia Court of Appeal Bauchi State has misapplied the principle in this case. (iii) Whether the Islamic Doctrine of long possession otherwise known as Hauzi applied even to land which is a subject matter of loan or borrowing. (iv) Whether the period of Islamic Doctrine of long possession is the same irrespective or whether the parties are related by blood. (v) Whether the decision of the Court of Appeal can be supported having regard to the weight of evidence.”


RATIONES DECIDENDI


CASES CITED


Igwego & Ors. v. Ezeugo & Anor. (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt.249) 561;|Fadiora & Anor. v. Gbadebo & Ors. (1978) 3 S.C. 219;|Sosan v. Ademuyiwa (1986) 3 N WLR (Pt.27) 241|Esi v. Chief Secretary (1973) 2 S.C. 189


STATUTES REFERRED TO


None.|


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT 

Comments are closed.