Legalpedia Citation: (2013) Legalpedia (SC) 61616

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

HOLDEN AT ABUJA

Thu Dec 12, 2013

Suit Number: SC. 135/2005

CORAM

PARTIES

MISS NKIRU AMOBI (A.K.A. NKIRU NZEGWU) APPELLANTS

MRS. GRACE O. NZEGWUBUKOLA CHIEDU NZEGWUTHEOPHILUS NZEGWU RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Respondent in this appeal instituted an action against the Appellant claiming that she is entitled to the grant of letter of administration of estate on behalf of her late husband who died intestate. From the fact of the case, there was a validly subsisting marriage under the Act between the Claimant/Respondent and her late husband. However, there was a petition for dissolution of the marriage and a decree nisi has been ordered by the court, but the husband of the Claimant/Respondent died before the decree nisi became absolute. Meanwhile, why the marriage between the Claimant/Respondent was still subsisting, the Defendant/Appellant claimed that she contracted a customary marriage with the husband of the deceased and he has transferred his properties in Lagos to her through a deed of conveyance. The trial court held that the person entitled to the grant of letter of administration of the estate is the Respondent. The Appellant being aggrieved with the decision of the trial court appealed to the court of appeal which upheld the judgment of the trial court, being aggrieved with the judgment of the Court of Appeal again, she appealed to the Supreme Court

HELD

Appeal dismissed

ISSUES

“Whether the Court below was right in holding that the High Court of Lagos State had the jurisdiction to grant Letters of Administration to administer the estate of the deceased” Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal were right when they held that the 1st Respondent, as against the Appellant was entitled to Letters of Administration over the estate of Engineer Theophilus I. O. Nzegwu (Deceased) and in affirming the exercise of discretion of the learned trial Judge to grant Letters of Administration to the 1st Respondent Whether the learned Justices of the court of Appeal were right when they held that the order or directive of the learned trial judge that the Appellant be “arrested”, “charged”, “tried” and “convicted” for bigamy was a passing remark and therefore not appealable

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

Orunengimo & Anor. Vs Egebe & Ors. (2008) ALL FWLR (Pt.400) 655|Balogun Vs Adejobi (1995) 1 SCNJ 242; (1995) 2 NWLR (Pt.376) 131:|Olatunji Vs Adisa (1995) 2 SCNJ 90; (1995) 2 NWLR (Pt.376) 167|Saleh vs. B.O.N. Ltd (2O06) 6 NWLR (Pt.976) 316|Agbaje vs. Fashola (2008) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1082) ;|Mafimisebi vs. Ehuwa (2007) ALL FWLR (Pt.355) 562|Egbe Vs Alhaji (1990) 3 SC (Pt.III) 63|Leedo Presidential Hotel Ltd. Vs B.O.N. (Nig.) Ltd. (1993) 1 NWLR (269) 334|Madukolu v. Nkemdilim (1962) 2 SCNLR 342;|Galadima v. Tabmbai (2000) 6 SC. (Pt.1) 196;|Araka v. Ejeagwu (2000) 12 SC (Pt.1) 99;|Dangana & Anor v. Usman & Ors. (2012) 2 SC (Pt.1) 99;|Dangana & Anor v. Usman & Ors. (2012) 2 SC (Pt.III) 103|Olanrewaju v. Governor of Oyo State (1992) 11 – 12 SCNJ 92;|Ahmed v. Kassim (1958) 3 FSC 51; (1958) SCNLR 28;|Agbaje v. Fashola (2008) ALL FWLR (Pt.443) 1302|COrunengimo & Anor. Vs Egebe & Ors. (2008) ALL FWLR (Pt.400) 65

STATUTES REFERRED TO

MATRIMONIAL CAUSES ACT|

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT