OKWO EJIOFOR VS EZE ONYEKWE

CORAM

COKER,JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

IKECHI FRANCIS OGBUAGU (Lead Judgment) JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT.

COKER JUSTICE SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

OKWO EJIOFOR (for himself and on behalf of the people of Ukala-Okpunor) APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The plaintiffs claim that the land in dispute is Ikono land and comprises of two portions; Ofia Ikono and Ogodor Farm land. In 1910 the boundary between the plaintiffs people and the defendants people was fixed by a District Officer. The defendants claims the land in dispute as the property of the defendants people from time.

HELD

The court held the appeal succeeded and the plaintiffs case was non- suited

ISSUES

That the learned trial Judge should not have awarded costs to the defendants since it was the plaintiff that has won the declaration even if in respect of part only of the entire area which he had claimed;

That the learned trial Judge should have non-suited the plaintiff in respect of the claim for declaration of title to the whole of the lands claimed and in respect to the other claims which are ancillary to and dependent on the claim for a declaration of title.

RATIONES DECIDENDI

EFFECT OF AN ORDER OF DISMISSAL

“An order of dismissal operates as estoppel per rem judicatam and, ipso facto, bars the losing party for all times from re-litigating the same subject-matter. A finding that such a party is entitled to some though not ascertained portions of the land in dispute is not consistent with an order of dismissal. If a plaintiff fails in toto to prove his case, an order of dismissal should normally follow, but where the failure was only due to a technical hitch, the evidence of the merits showing the entitlement of the plaintiff to the land claimed or portions of it and the defendants not being entitled to the judgement of the court, the interest of justice demands that such a plaintiff should not be forever shut out from re-presenting his case.” COKER, JSC.<foo< p=””></foo<>