CORAM
KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UWANI MUSA ABBA AJI
PARTIES
1. FABIAN ONYEJEKWE2. OBIECHINA ONYEJEKWE3. HERBERT ONYEJEKWE(For themselves and on behalf of Orowa family of Ogbeoza Village, Onitsha excluding the plaintiffs) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Respondents who were the Plaintiffs at the trial Court instituted this action and claimed against the Appellants for equitable distribution or sharing of 18 plots of family land known as Owelebo which plots of land were allocated to Orowa family by the Umueze Aroli Community.The learned trial judge considered the pleadings and evidence adduced and resolved in his judgment that the plaintiffs/ respondents have failed to prove that the sharing of the plots must be made through ‘Usokwu system. Secondly, the plaintiffs/respondents have failed to prove that the method used in sharing of the plots was inequitable. He therefore dismissed the claim.
HELD
The Court set aside the decision of Court of Appeal on the ground that it is not supported by pleadings and evidence and upheld the decision of the trial High Court as equitable method adopted in sharing the 18 plots i.e. through spiritual headship, marital status and age. The respondents had failed to find fault in the system during trial.
ISSUES
Whether the learned Justices of the Court of Appeal awarded the plaintiffs/respondents more than what they sought?
RATIONES DECIDENDI
APPELLATE COURT NOT TO EMBARK ON A FRESH APPRAISAL OF EVIDENCE
It is not the business of the Court of Appeal to substitute its own view for the views of the trial court. If there has been proper appraisal of evidence by a trial court, a Court of Appeal ought not to embark on a fresh appraisal of the same evidence in order to arrive at a different conclusion from that reached by the trial court. -per Uthman Mohammed JSC
BURDEN OF PROOF
It is trite that the burden of proving particular fact is on the party who seeks to rely on it and who will fail where such evidence is not adduced. -per Uthman Mohammed JSC
WHERE PLEADINGS ARE JOINED
Where pleadings have been joined by the parties in a case the judgment of the court must be based both on the facts and the law on issues joined by the parties on their pleadings. A court should not embark on dealing with issues not raised in the pleadings nor should it give judgment on issues on which either counsel had not been called upon to address the court. -per Uthman Mohammed JSC
CASES CITED
African Continental Seaways Ltd v Nigeria Dredging Roads and General Works Ltd (1977) 5 SC. 235 at 248Akinloye & Anor v Eyiyola & Ors. (1968) NMLR 29Akinloye & Anor v Eyiyola & Ors. (1968) NMLR 92 at 93Aseimo & Ors .v Amos & Ors. (1975) NSCC 43Awoyale v Ogunbiyi (1986) 2 NWLR (Part 24) 626 at 627Ezomo v Attorney-General Bendel State (1986) 4 NWLR (Part 36) 448 at 462
STATUTES REFERRED TO
NONE