CORAM

---

ABUBAKAR BASHIR WALI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

EMMANUEL OBIOMA OGWUEGBU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

YEKINI OLAYIWOLA ADIO JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ANTHONY IKECHUKWU IGUH JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

MIDFORD EDOSOMWAN APPELLANTS

---

RESPONDENTS

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

Sometime in 1975 the appellant purchased a land from P.W.2, Unwensuyi Edosomwan. Having purchased the land, the appellant cleared it and started planting food crops in it. the respondent came into the land accompanied by some mobile police, drove out the appellant and his workers, and constructed a wall round the land in dispute.

---

HELD

---

The appeal was therefore dismissed with N1,000.00 costs to the respondent.

---

ISSUES

---

“1. Whether or not the Court of Appeal was right in the view it took on the onus of proof.

2. Whether oral evidence of the document marked Exhibit “X” rejected, is admissible in the circumstances of this case.”

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE

---

The general principle of law on the issue is that a statement oral or written (expressed or implied) made by a party in civil proceedings and which statement is adverse to his case, is admissible against him of the truth of the facts asserted in the Statement

The usual case in which the rule that oral evidence of a written document is not admissible in evidence arises where the very party giving the oral evidence now seeks to back it up with a document which is then found to be inadmissible in evidence. He is then precluded from relying on whatever oral evidence he had given before, even if it was unchallenged, on the ground that oral evidence i.e. secondary evidence, of a written document cannot be given except in certain circumstances. And that proof of a document must be by primary evidence vide section 95 of the Evidence Act. Per WALI, JSC

---

OWNERSHIP OF LAND PRIOR TO THE LAND USE ACT

---

It is the settled customary law that all land in Benin before the Land Use Act, 1978, was vested in the Oba of Benin and it was he alone that could approve the allocation of a plot of land through the appropriate Plot Allotment Committee

---

BURDEN OF PROOF IN CIVIL CASES

---

The law is that where a fact or facts are pleaded and no evidence was led to prove them no onus is cast on the other party to disprove the fact or facts not established.In a case for a declaration of title to land the burden of proof squarely rests on the plaintiff, and where he fails to do so, the proper order is one of dismissal of his case.

---

CASES CITED

---

Kodilinye v. Odu (1935) 2 WACA 336,
Quo Vadis Hotels & Restaurants Ltd. v. Commissioner of Lands Mid-Western State & Ors. (1973) 6 S.C. 72;
Agbaje v. Agboluaje (1974) 1 All NLR 21 and
Nwokafor & Ors. v. Nwankwo Udegbe & Ors. (1963) 1 All NLR 104,
Seismograph Service (Nigeria) Ltd. v. Chief Keke Ogbenegweke Eyuafe (1976) 9 and 10 S.C. 135 at 146 .

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

None

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT