CORAM

PARTIES

MRS ABIMBOLA BOLANLE ABU APPELLANTS

INTERCONTINENTAL HOMES SAVINGS & LOANS PLC RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Claimant/Appellant commenced this suit against the 2nd Defendant/Respondent claiming a declaration that the tenor of the mortgage facility granted to him for the purchase of the property at 16, Lisabi Street, off pedro Road, Shomolu is August 2015 and the 2nd Defendant cannot abridge the time and act on the property without consultation with or consent of the Claimant in her capacity as joint owner, a declaration that the 2nd Defendant is a trustee for the Claimant for the 36.37 percent contribution in the acquisition and processing of Governors consent in respect of the said property and an order restraining the 2nd Defendant from exercising any unilateral power over the property to the detriment of the Claimant who is the joint owner of the property. The Respondent counter claimed and sought for a declaration that by virtue of the Deed of Assignment registered as No.48 at page 48 in Volume 2238 of the Land Registry office, Lagos, he is the owner of the Statutory right of Occupancy in respect of the said property and that by virtue of the ownership, he has the legal right to sell and pass title in the property to a third party among others. The Respondent alternatively sought for an order directing the immediate payment of the sum of N9, 323, 361, 35 being the outstanding balance payable on the said property among others. At the close of trial, the learned trial judge dismissed the Appellant’s claim in its entirety and some reliefs in the Respondent’s counter claim. It also non-suited the Respondent with respect to the alternative claims. Dissatisfied with the trial court’s judgement, the Appellant has appealed against same to this court.

HELD

Appeal Dismissed.

ISSUES

?    Whether having regard to the pleadings and the facts the trial court was right in construing the existence of only equitable mortgage transaction and upon the basis of that dismissing the reliefs sought by the appellant in its entirety — Grounds 1, 2, 3,& 5 of the Notice of Appeal.?    Whether in the circumstance and having regard to the pleadings and the facts the Respondent ought to have been non- suited in its claim-ground 4 of the Notice of Appeal.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

CASES CITED

STATUTES REFERRED TO

None

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT