COMMISSIONER FOR AGRICULTURE, ADAMAWA STATE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE & ANOR v. GLOBAL INVESTMENT NIG LTD. & ORS
May 28, 2021CHIEF EDMUND OBI v. CHIKEZIE UZOEWULU
May 28, 2021MUHAMMADU BELLO (DALDO) & ANOR v. KABIRU GARBA & ANOR.
(2021) Legalpedia (CA) 17111
In the Court of Appeal
HOLDEN AT YOLA
Wednesday, February 10, 2021
Suite Number: SC.242/2008
CORAM
CHIDI NWAOMA UWA
JAMES SHEHU ABIRIYI
ABDULLAHI M. BAYERO
MUHAMMADU BELLO (DALDO) || KABIRU GARBA
AREA(S) OF LAW
APPEAL
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Respondents instituted this action against the Appellants before the High Court of Taraba State holding at Jalingo, wherein by their amended statement of claim sought for a declaration of title to the land in dispute in their favour, a declaration that the Appellants were trespassers and an order of perpetual injunction restraining the Appellants from trespassing on the land. The Respondents’ case was that their grandparents founded the land in dispute over one hundred (100) years ago. The ruins of their parents’ settlement and graves are on the land. In 1998, Appellants’ parents settled on the land and when they were confronted, they said they were settling only on a temporary basis. In 2013, the Appellants approached the Emir of Old Muri and said they wanted to remain on the land permanently but the Respondents did not agree. The Appellants started laying claim to the land in dispute. In their defence, the Appellants stated that they were grazing their cows during the rainy season each year on the land in dispute and they became the owners of the land by virtue of inheritance from their parents who were the founders of the land fifty (50) years ago. That they inherited the land and have been living and grazing there for several years without challenge from anybody including the Respondents. At the end trial, the lower Court entered judgment in favour of the Respondents and granted the reliefs sought by them in their amended statement of claim. Aggrieved by the decision, the Appellants have appealed to the Court of Appeal, Yola Division vide a Notice of Appeal containing five Grounds of Appeal.
||INTERESTED IN GETTING SUMMARIES LIKE THIS FOR FREE?||
HELD
Appeal Dismissed
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION
Whether on the evidence adduced by the parties, the court below rightly entered judgment in favour of the Respondents.
RATIONES
DECLARATORY RELIEFS – RATIONALE FOR THE GRANT OF DECLARATORY RELIEFS
“It is the law that declaratory reliefs are not granted as a matter of course and on a platter of gold. They are only granted when credible evidence has been led by the plaintiff or person seeking the declaratory relief. See Anyaru v. Mandilas Ltd. (2007) 4 SCNJ 288, Chukwuma v. S.P.D.C. (Nig.) Ltd (1993) LPELR-864 at 64 – 65 and Matanmi & Ors v. Dada & Anor (2013) LPELR – 1929”. –
“Where the adversary fails to cross examine a witness upon a particular matter the implication is that he accepts the truth of that matter as led in evidence. The court can take the silence of the adversary as acceptance that he does not dispute the fact. See Oforlete v. The State (2000) LPELR – 2270 SC, Isa v. State (2017) LPELR – 43472 SC, Ewugba v. State (2017) LPELR – 43833 SC and Oludamilola v. State (2010) LPELR – 2611 SC. –
STATUTES REFERRED TO
Not Available|
COUNSEL
1. J. D. Ubandoma Esq. for the Appellants.|2. D. A. Modibbo esq. for the Respondents.|
||INTERESTED IN GETTING SUMMARIES LIKE THIS FOR FREE?||
