CORAM
SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
IDIGBE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OBASEKI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
JOE IGA JOSHUA IGA SEMENI IGA PHILEMON IGA (For themselves and for and on behalf of Iga House.) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The respondents claim for a declaration that the land in dispute known as Tomobiri Poku Kiri was the joint or common property of the appellant (Amakiri House) and the respondent (Iga House) was granted by the trial court.
HELD
It was held by the court that by virtue of the Native Court judgement in suit No 191/54 the appellant were estopped from denying the interest of the respondent on the land.
ISSUES
whether that court gave judgment for Iga House alone or for Iga and Amakiri and Oputenga Houses. Per. OBASEKI, AG. JSC.
whether Tomobiri land was settled on by Amakiri, Iga and Oputenga the ancestors of the three families and owned jointly by the three families, or whether Amakiri was a stranger having no community of interest with Iga and Oputenga Houses. Per. OBASEKI, AG. JSC.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
ADMISSION IN LAW
<br< p=””></br<>
THE PRINCIPLE OF ESTOPPEL
“If a man by his words or conduct willfully endeavours to cause another to believe in a certain state of things which the first knows to be false and if the second believes in such state of things and acts upon his belief, he who knowingly made the false statement is estopped from averring afterwards that such a state of things does not exist at the time: again, if a man either in express terms or by conduct, makes a representation to another of the existence of a state of facts which he intends to be acted upon in that way, in the belief of the existence of such a state of facts, to the damage of him who so believes and acts, the first is estopped from denying the existence of such a state of facts: Thirdly, if a man whatever his real meaning may be, so conducts himself that reasonable man would take his conduct to mean a certain representation of facts and that it was a true representation, and that the latter was intended to act upon it in a particular way, and he with such belief, does act in that way to his damage, the first is estopped from denying the facts as represented.” Per. OBASEKI, AG. JSC.
STATEMENT ON OATH
“Any statement made by a man on oath may be used against him as an admission” Per. OBASEKI, AG. JSC.
CASES CITED
Nassar and Sons (Nigeria) Ltd. v. L.E.D.B. 4 FSC 243
Ajayi v. Aina, 16 NLR 67 at p. 71
Ex-parte Hall in Re: Cooper (1881-1882) 19 CLD 580 at 583)
Queen v. Lt. Governor, Eastern Region (1957) 2 FSC 46 at page 48
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Evidence Law Cap.49 Laws of Eastern Nigeria 1963