M.A. AKINSUROJU & ORS VS CHIEF PAUL O. JOSHUA - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

M.A. AKINSUROJU & ORS VS CHIEF PAUL O. JOSHUA

GARUBA ABIOYE & ORS VS SA’ADU YAKUBU & ORS
July 11, 2025
YUNUSA ADAMU & ORS VS THE STATE
July 11, 2025
GARUBA ABIOYE & ORS VS SA’ADU YAKUBU & ORS
July 11, 2025
YUNUSA ADAMU & ORS VS THE STATE
July 11, 2025
Show all

M.A. AKINSUROJU & ORS VS CHIEF PAUL O. JOSHUA

Legalpedia Citation: (1991) Legalpedia (SC) 11151

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Fri Jun 7, 1991

Suit Number: SC. 216/1986

CORAM


CHRISTOPHER MITCHEL CHUKWUMA-ENEH, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

MUHAMMADU L. UWAIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

MUHAMMADU SAIFULLAH MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

P.NNAEMEKA-AGU – JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ANDREWS O. OBASEKI

MUHAMMADU LAWAL UWAIS JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT


PARTIES


M. O. AKINSUROJU (The Lapoki of Aye)CHIEF OGIDIMOZACHEAUS LOYIMIJOHN ADUWO(For and on behalf of themselves and the Ikale Aye people of Epewe Imobi and Mororo respectively) APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The appeal was against the dismissal of the appellant’s appeal by the Court of Appeal. The court below held that the action brought by the appellant/plaintiff was brought in a representative capacity but evidence led showed otherwise. The court of appeal set aside the judgment of the trial court and dismissed the action. The appellants have now appealed to the supreme court.


HELD


Appeal  allowed.


ISSUES


“Whether having regard to the representative nature of the action before the court as borne out by the writ of summons as well as the Statements of Claim and Defence and also having regard to the relevance of the 1948 cases to the subject matter of this appeal, the learned Justices of appeal were right to refuse to confirm a declaration of title to the land in dispute in favour of the appellants”.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


WHEN AN ORDER OF NON-SUIT WILL BE MADE


“…..an order of non-suit is to be made in the following circumstances -(a) Where the plaintiff has not failed in toto or entirely to prove his case; and(b) Where the defendant is not in any event entitled to the courts judgment; and(c) Where no wrong or injustice to the defendant would be caused by such order”.(Per M.L.UWAIS,JSC)


CASES CITED


1. Olagbemiro v. Ajagungbade III, (1990) 3 NWLR (Pt. 136) 37 at p.42 .2. A.C.B. Ltd. v. Chief F.S. Yesufu, (1989) 1-2 SC. 49 at p.5


STATUTES REFERRED TO


1. The High Court Rules, Cap. 45 of the Laws of Ondo State, 1978


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT 

Comments are closed.