Legalpedia Citation: (2011-06) Legalpedia (SC) 11119
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Jun 10, 2011
Suit Number: SC.63/2004
CORAM
MUHAMMADSAILULLAH MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUFUNLOLA OYELOLA ADEKEYE , JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OLUFUNLOLA OYELOLA ADEKEYE , JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1.HIS HIGHNESS, ALHAJI A. G. MOMOH Ikelebe II, the Otaru of Auchi.
2. ALHAJI PRINCE S. B. IKHARO
3.EBIDANEYI UMORU (Substituted by Order of Court dated 04/11/82). ALHAJI COL. F.A.Z. SHIELU (Substituted by Order of Court dated 08/7/91, For themselves and on behalf of Auchi Community).
APPELLANT(S) / APPLICANT(S) / PLAINTIFF(S)
HIS HIGHNESS, ALHAJI I.M.J. UMORU
DEFENDANTS/ RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The present appellants as plaintiff first commenced the action in 1981. The trial judge refused to grant the declaratory reliefs sought. Dissatisfied, the plaintiffs appealed to the court below, which allowed the appeal but made an order remitting the case to the High Court for re-hearing de-novo. The re-hearing commenced before Maidoh J but on the creation of Delta State from Bendel and the subsequent deployment of Maidoh J, the case was re-assigned to Sadoh J who decided in favour of the defendants in 1994. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal which was resolved against them. ?
HELD
Appeal dismissed ?
ISSUES
1.Whether the Learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right in law and on the facts in holding that the appellants failed to prove their case at the Court of First instance ?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
WHEN A FINDING IS SAID TO BE PERVERSE
“A finding is said to be perverse when it runs counter to the evidence and pleadings or where it has been shown that the trial judge took account of matters which he ought not to have taken into account or shuts his eyes to the obvious or when such finding has occasioned a miscarriage of justice.” PER GALADIMA JSC
CASES CITED
None.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.