CORAM
ALOYSIUS IYORGYER KATSINA-ALU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURTDAHIRU MUSDAHPER JUSTICE, SUPREME SUNDAY AKINOLA
IBRAHIM TANKO MUHAMMAD, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT (Lead Judgment)
UTHMAN MOHAMMED JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
1. . JACOB A. JOLAYEMI2. . EZEKIEL A. AJAYI3.OYEDELE AJIBOYE(For themselves and other members of Imoji Compound Arandun) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellants claimed and proved that their family is exclusively entitled to the chieftaincy position in dispute and that they had been occupying the office since 1931 when the village was formed. The respondents offered no evidence in proof of their pleadings to the contrary.
HELD
The court held that the appellant was entitled to judgment and that the lower courts were in error to have relied on Exhibit D proceedings of a meeting which the appellant did not attend to find that the chieftaincy position was met to be rotated.
ISSUES
1. Which of the traditional histories should the courts below have believed having regard to the pleadings and evidence led at the trial of this action.2. Were the High Court and the Court of Appeal right in considering pre- 1931 history when determining which family was entitled to produce the chieftaincy title Ejemu – Alaran of Arandun.3. Was proper consideration given to the contents of Exhibit D.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CASES CITED
1. Ogunbiyi V. Adewunmi (1988) 5 NWLR (pt. 93) 217;2. Akeredolu V. Akinyemi (1989) 3 NWLR (pt. 108) 164;3. Kale V. Coker (1982) 12 SC 252;4. Karibo V. Grend (1992) 3 NWLR (pt 230) 426.5. Achinora V. Ajufo (1988) 3 NWLR (pt. 80) 1.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None.