CORAM
Hamma Akawu Barka Justice of the Court of Appeal
Olasumbo Olanrewaju Goodluck Justice of the Court of Appeal
Kenneth Ikechukwu Amadi Justice of the Court of Appeal
PARTIES
1. MR. BAMIROLE OLOFORIJI
2. MR. EGBUNGBOHUN OLOFORIJI
3. MR. DAVID OLOFORIJI
4. MR. ABIALA OLOFORIJI
APPELLANTS
1. FASESI FESTUS AKINOSI
2. OROBIYI AMOSU
3. MR. AYELOLU GBEKAN
4. MR. DAIRO EDUN
5. MR. KOLAWOLE AYO
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
• Land Law
• Evidence
• Practice and Procedure
• Customary Law
• Ownership and Title Disputes
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellants, Mr. Bamirole Oloforiji and others, brought an appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Ogun State, which had ruled in favor of the respondents, Fasesi Festus Akinosi and others, in a land dispute concerning the ownership of Asaga land. The respondents, representing the Arogundade family, claimed ownership of the land based on traditional evidence, while the appellants asserted their right over the land as descendants of Olofiriji.
The trial court had found that the respondents had successfully proven their ownership of the land, having traced their lineage to Ajao, the founder of the Arogundade family, who first settled on the land. The appellants challenged this finding on the grounds that the respondents had failed to adequately identify the land in dispute, contending that it was part of Igbo Kofi land, to which their ancestor Goye had laid claim.
HELD
The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the lower court. It held that the respondents had adequately proven their root of title through traditional evidence and acts of long possession. The court found that there was no dispute over the identity of the land, as both parties were aware of the location of the land in question. The appellants’ failure to challenge key findings from the lower court weakened their case. The court awarded N50,000.00 in costs against the appellants.
ISSUES
1. Whether there was a proper identification of the land in dispute by the respondents?
2. Whether the respondents had successfully proven ownership of the land in dispute, entitling them to a declaration of title?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
Proof of Title – Traditional evidence as a means of establishing title
“It is settled law that one of the ways to establish ownership of land is through traditional evidence. In this case, the respondents successfully traced their root of title to Ajao, the founder of the Arogundade family, who first settled on the land. This traditional history, unchallenged by the appellants, was sufficient to establish ownership.” Per O. O. Goodluck, J.C.A.
Identity of Land – Requirement for proper identification of land in dispute
“Where there is no dispute between the parties regarding the identity of the land, there is no need for a survey plan or visit to the locus in quo. In this case, both parties knew the exact location of the land in dispute, and the trial court was right in relying on this knowledge.” Per H. A. Barka, J.C.A.
Inheritance Under Customary Law – Position of female descendants in inheritance disputes
“Under Yoruba customary law, female descendants are entitled to inherit their ancestors’ property. The trial court rightly rejected the appellants’ argument that the female descendants of the Arogundade family, including Tombo, could not inherit the family land.” Per K. I. Amadi, J.C.A.
Burden of Proof in Land Disputes – Onus on c, J.C.A.laimant to prove title
“In a claim for declaration of title to land, the burden lies on the claimant to prove their case by credible evidence. In this case, the respondents successfully discharged this burden by presenting traditional evidence and acts of long possession.” Per O. O. Goodluck
Contradictions in Evidence – Effect of contradictions on credibility
“The appellants’ evidence was riddled with contradictions, particularly regarding the identity of the land. These contradictions weakened their case and bolstered the respondents’ claim of ownership.” Per H. A. Barka, J.C.A.
Acts of Possession – Role of long possession in establishing ownership
“Long possession and acts of ownership can serve as evidence of title to land. The respondents proved that they and their ancestors had been in possession of the land for generations, further strengthening their claim.” Per O. O. Goodluck, J.C.A.
Partitioning of Family Land – Impact of failure to partition land on ownership claims
“The fact that the land had not been partitioned among the members of the Arogundade family did not affect the respondents’ claim. The land remained family property, and no member of the family could claim exclusive ownership until partitioning occurred.” Per K. I. Amadi, J.C.A.
Failure to Appeal Key Findings – Consequences of failure to challenge findings on appeal
“The appellants failed to appeal critical findings made by the trial court, including the finding that the respondents had proven their ownership through traditional evidence. This failure weakened their appeal and led to its dismissal.” Per H. A. Barka, J.C.A.
Trespass – Legal consequences of trespassing on land without title
“The appellants, lacking any legal title to the land, were trespassers. The trial court was correct in finding them liable for trespass and granting the respondents’ claim for an injunction against further trespass.” Per O. O. Goodluck, J.C.A.
Effect of Unchallenged Testimony – Unchallenged evidence considered as admitted
“The appellants failed to effectively challenge the respondents’ testimony at trial, particularly the evidence of traditional history. The unchallenged testimony was accepted by the court as proof of ownership.” Per K. I. Amadi, J.C.A.
Traditional History – Relevance of unbroken lineage in proving title
“The respondents successfully traced their lineage from the original founder of the land, Ajao, to the present generation. This unbroken line of succession, coupled with acts of possession, was sufficient to prove their title.” Per O. O. Goodluck, J.C.A.
Gift of Land Under Customary Law – Legal effect of gift of land for subsistence
“The respondents’ ancestors had gifted a portion of the land to the appellants’ family for subsistence farming, not for ownership. This gift did not transfer legal title to the appellants.” Per H. A. Barka, J.C.A.
Evaluation of Evidence – Duty of trial court to evaluate evidence impartially
CASES CITED
STATUTES REFERRED TO
2. Land Use Act
3. Customary Law of Yoruba Land