OKENWA V. MILITARY GOVERNOR, IMO STATE - Legalpedia | The Complete Lawyer - Research | Productivity | Health

OKENWA V. MILITARY GOVERNOR, IMO STATE

ALHAJI LASISI YUSUF VS UNION BANK OF NIGERIA LTD
July 4, 2025
CHIEF P.D.C. OKENWA VS MILITARY GOVERNOR, IMO STATE & ORS
July 4, 2025
ALHAJI LASISI YUSUF VS UNION BANK OF NIGERIA LTD
July 4, 2025
CHIEF P.D.C. OKENWA VS MILITARY GOVERNOR, IMO STATE & ORS
July 4, 2025
Show all

OKENWA V. MILITARY GOVERNOR, IMO STATE

Legalpedia Citation: (1996) Legalpedia (SC) 22386

In the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Tue Jun 25, 1996

Suit Number: SC.156/1990

CORAM


MUHAMMADU LAWAL UWAIS, CHIEF JUSTICE NIGERIA (Presided)

ABUBAKAR BASHIR WALI, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

MICHAEL EKUNDAYO OGUNDARE, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

YEKINI OLAYIWOLA ADIO, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

ANTHONY IKECHUKWU IGUH, JUSTICE SUPREME COURT(Read the Leading Judgment)


PARTIES


CHIEF P. D. C. OKENWA APPELLANTS


RESPONDENTS


AREA(S) OF LAW



SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiff was the traditional ruler of Ihitenansa Autonomous Community and was subsequently withdrawn from such by Imo State Government is contrary to the Imo State Chieftaincy Law No. 22 of 1978.


HELD


There will be costs to the appellant against each set of respondents which I fix at N200.00 in the court below and N1000.00 in this court.


ISSUES


Whether an appellant’s reply brief may also contain a supplementary brief, separately and distinctly marked, following leave granted by the court, after the appellant had filed his appellant’s brief, for the said appellant to file a supplementary brief in support of a new issue to be raised in the appeal.


RATIONES DECIDENDI


PURPORT OF TRADITIONAL RULERS AND AUTONOMOUS COMMUNITIES LAW NO. 11 OF 1981


In the present case, the point of law raised, even from the arguments advanced in the briefs of the parties, clearly admits of more than one interpretation. A decision thereupon is not only necessary but crucial to a just determination of the suit which concerns who, in law, is the Traditional Ruler of the autonomous community in question. I am therefore of the view that the question as to the true interpretation and effect of the provisions of the said Traditional Rulers and Autonomous Communities Law No. 11 of 1981, the subject matter of the fresh point sought to be raised, is a substantial point of law for the determination of the court below. Whether, however, it is valid or meritorious, as I have observed, is quite a different matter. Per IGUH, JSC


CASES CITED


None.


STATUTES REFERRED TO


None.


CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT

Comments are closed.