CORAM
IRIKEFE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
OKAY ACHIKE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ESO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
NNAMANI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UWAIS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
KAYODE OKUOJA APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The case of the respondents is that their predecessor-in-title (Adedeji Ishola) bought parcels of land including the land in dispute from one Ajayi Oluguno, while the appellants claim that their family is the owners from time immemorial of the land in dispute.
HELD
The Court held that the appeal is allowed. The majority judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal dated 25th June, 1980 including the order for costs is hereby set aside.
ISSUES
1. Whether the acts of user and possession alleged by the respondents are enough to give them and their family title to the land in dispute.
2. Whether the various suits pleaded and relied on by the respondents relate to the land in dispute.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
PRESUMPTION ON FINDINGS OF FACT
2. “The presumption is that the findings of fact by the trial Judge are right and the duty to displace such a presumption falls on the party challenging them.” Nnamani, JSC.
PROOF OF TITLE
1. “If sufficient and positive acts of ownership extending over a long period had been established the respondents could have been entitled to the inference that they were exclusive owners of the land in dispute.” Nnamani, JSC.
CASES CITED
1. Ntoe Ekpo Eta Ekpo v. Chief Eta Eta Ita II NLR 68
2. Chief victor Woluchem & Ors v. Chief Simon Gudi & ors. (1981) 5 S.C. 291 at 295 and 326
3. Kojo v. Bonsie (1953) 14 WACA 242
4. Akesse v. Ababio (1935) 2 WACA 264
5. Kisiedu & Ors v. Dompreh & Ors (1935) 2 WACA 268.
6. R.v. Ologen 2 WACA 333
STATUTES REFERRED TO
None