TARABA STATE GOVERNMENT & ORS V MALLAM NASIRU AUDU BABA
April 3, 2025HAYATOU ZAPHANIAH V ALLEN GARBA & ANOR
April 3, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2019) Legalpedia (CA) 85562
In the Court of Appeal
HOLDEN AT YOLA
Sun Dec 8, 2019
Suit Number: CA/YL/70/2018
CORAM
PARTIES
MAHAMOOD BUBA BINDIR APPELLANTS
JIBRILLA BASHIR RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Appellant as Plaintiff at the trial High Court of Adamawa State, sought a declaration that he is the owner of the parcel of land known as Plot No.3H Road measuring 1350 square meters based on GYSP 38 Yola, Government Layout at Yola Town adjacent Shagari Housing Estate, an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Respondents from interfering with the Appellant’s ownership and possession of the land and two million Naira being special and general damages against each of the Respondents. The 1st Respondent also claimed ownership of the land which according to him he bought from one Jibrilla Sarkin Zana. The Court below considered the evidence led by the parties and addresses of learned counsel and in a considered judgment dismissed the claim of the Appellant. Dissatisfied with the decision of the trial High Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES
Whether the Court below was right in its decision to dismiss the claim of the Appellant.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
LACHES – DEFINITION OF LACHES
“Black’s Law Dictionary 10th Edition defines laches as unreasonable delay in pursuing a right or claim in a way that prejudices the party against whom relief is sought. The Supreme Court in Oduola & Ors vs. Ibadan City Council and Anor (1979) LPELR-2255 SC at page 16 – 17 emphasised that lapse of time and delay are most relevant. Therefore the Court will consider the length of delay in any given circumstances and the nature of the acts done during the interval which might affect either party and cause a balance of justice or injustice in taking one course or the other so far as it relates to the remedy”.
DECLARATORY RELIEF- DUTY OF A PARTY SEEKING DECLARATORY RELIEF.
“The Appellant’s main relief was declaratory in nature and the law is that the plaintiff must plead and prove his claim for declaratory relief without relying on the evidence called by the defendant. A declaratory relief is not granted even on admission by the defendant. See Matanmi & Ors vs. Dada & Anor (2013) LPELR.”
COURT PROCESS- EFFECT OF FAILURE TO FILE A REPLY TO AVERMENTS IN A STATEMENT OF CLAIM
“Also it is the law that where a plaintiff fails to file a reply to averments in a statement of defence which have not been taken care of in his statement of claim, he would be deemed to have admitted the averments in the statement of defence. See Iwuola vs. NIPOST Ltd (2003) 8 NWLR (Pt. 822) 308.”
CASES CITED
